From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
rob@landley.net, Charlie Baylis <cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:00:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F3BEA65.8080907@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20030814070119.GN32488@holomorphy.com
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:09, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>>>"scale" on which scheduling events should happen, and as tasks become
>>>more cpu-bound, they have longer timeslices, so that two cpu-bound
>>>tasks of identical priority will RR very slowly and have reduced
>>>context switch overhead, but are near infinitely preemptible by more
>>>interactive or short-running tasks.
>>
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 04:59:33PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
>>Actually the timeslice handed out is purely dependent on the static priority,
>>not the priority it is elevated or demoted to by the interactivity estimator.
>>However lower priority tasks (cpu bound ones if the estimator has worked
>>correctly) will always be preempted by higher priority tasks (interactive
>>ones) whenever they wake up.
>
>
> So it is; the above commentary was rather meant to suggest that the
> lengthening of timeslices in conventional arrangements did not penalize
> interactive tasks, not to imply that priority preemption was not done
> at all in the current scheduler.
If my guess from my previous email was correct (that is pri 5 gets
shorter timeslide than pri 6), then that means that tasks of higher
static priority have are penalized more than lower pri tasks for expiring.
Say a task has to run for 15ms. If it's at a priority that gives it a
10ms timeslice, then it'll expire and get demoted. If it's at a
priority that gives it a 20ms timeslice, then it'll not expire and
therefore get promoted.
Is that fair?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-14 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-04 19:50 [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Charlie Baylis
2003-08-05 2:10 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-05 22:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-06 0:12 ` charlie.baylis
2003-08-06 1:23 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-06 22:24 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-11 8:14 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-11 23:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 0:17 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-12 15:04 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 23:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-13 15:46 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-14 6:09 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 6:59 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 7:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 7:46 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:03 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:40 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:00 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
2003-08-15 16:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:12 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-17 2:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-17 18:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-08-14 19:57 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:35 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:17 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-16 2:29 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 19:54 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-03 21:19 Voluspa
2003-08-04 2:34 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 10:14 Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-08-03 11:36 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-04 3:06 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:37 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F3BEA65.8080907@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).