From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S275353AbTHSFp4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:45:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S275357AbTHSFpz (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:45:55 -0400 Received: from waste.org ([209.173.204.2]:59059 "EHLO waste.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S275353AbTHSFpz (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:45:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 00:45:38 -0500 From: Matt Mackall To: Nick Piggin Cc: William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [CFT][PATCH] new scheduler policy Message-ID: <20030819054538.GA23889@waste.org> References: <3F4182FD.3040900@cyberone.com.au> <20030819023536.GZ32488@holomorphy.com> <3F418F7A.7090007@cyberone.com.au> <3F4192AD.1020305@cyberone.com.au> <20030819051533.GL16387@waste.org> <3F41B6CE.1000407@cyberone.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F41B6CE.1000407@cyberone.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 03:34:06PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Matt Mackall wrote: > > > > >You forgot to mention fork() splitting its timeslice 2/3 to 1/3 parent > >to child. > > > > > > Hmm... did I do that? I don't actually have the code in front of me, but I > think the timeslice split is still 50/50 (see fork.c). Its the priority > points that go 2/3 to 1/3. Actually its a bit more complex than that even > and probably not exactly right... Actually, it's as you say. The terms sleeptime and timeslice just confused me. -- Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : of or relating to the moon