From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 14:12:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F3D2290.6070804@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200308160238.05185.kernel@kolivas.org
Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 06:00, Timothy Miller wrote:
>
>>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?
>
>
> Yes, it's a simple cutoff at the end of the timeslice. If you use up the
> timeslice allocated to you, then you have to pass a test to see if you can go
> onto the active array or get expired. Since higher static priority (lower
> nice) tasks get longer timeslices, they are less likely to expire unless they
> are purely cpu bound and never sleep.
Ok, I'm just a little confused, because of this inversion of "high
priority" with "low numbers".
First, am I correct in understanding that a lower number means a higher
priority?
And for a higher priority, in addition to begin run before all tasks of
lower priority, they also get a longer timeslice?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-15 17:57 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
2003-08-15 16:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:12 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
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=3F3D2290.6070804@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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).