From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964988AbVL2DNl (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2005 22:13:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964989AbVL2DNl (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2005 22:13:41 -0500 Received: from smtp103.plus.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.206.236]:63832 "HELO smtp103.plus.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964988AbVL2DNk (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2005 22:13:40 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=BrVlyRH/NIMzT8tDX3v9K1Ty699TJT4CNT7BAKruhRWKjckrjQ0TqCRdnSw7BKqNdsDtA9OAXS3AS1vFYLNCuu0sV0OTkrKp6aGa7nD4huYIBchN+rKYaW/HTjoNtbZ2jhCLbH4YYKdj0R0Hzrenb4aLpvWWR/k06PqgDQm4PF4= ; Message-ID: <43B3545D.3010508@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:13:33 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Williams CC: Paolo Ornati , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Con Kolivas , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [SCHED] Totally WRONG prority calculation with specific test-case (since 2.6.10-bk12) References: <20051227190918.65c2abac@localhost> <20051227224846.6edcff88@localhost> <43B1D551.5050503@bigpond.net.au> <20051228112058.2c0c1137@localhost> <43B29540.1030904@bigpond.net.au> In-Reply-To: <43B29540.1030904@bigpond.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Williams wrote: > Paolo Ornati wrote: >> 1) nicksched: perfect! This is the behaviour I want. >> ... >> >> transcode get recognized for what it is, and I/O bounded processes >> don't even notice that it is running :) > > > Interesting. This one's more or less a dead scheduler and hasn't had > any development work done on it for some time. I just keep porting the > original version to new kernels. > It isn't a dead scheduler any more than any of the other out of tree schedulers are (which isn't saying much, unfortunately). I've probably got a small number of cleanups and microoptimisations relative to what you have (I can't remember exactly what you sucked up) ... but other than that there hasn't been much development work done for some time because there is not much wrong with it. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com