From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270552AbTGNHzR (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 03:55:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270559AbTGNHzQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 03:55:16 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20]:31679 "HELO mail.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S270552AbTGNHzL (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2003 03:55:11 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20030714100438.01be5008@pop.gmx.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:14:11 +0200 To: Davide Libenzi From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [patch] SCHED_SOFTRR starve-free linux scheduling policy ... Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030714063443.01bcc5f0@pop.gmx.net> <5.2.1.1.2.20030714063443.01bcc5f0@pop.gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org At 12:12 AM 7/14/2003 -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: >On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > While testing, I spotted something pretty strange. It's not specific to > > SCHED_SOFTRR, SCHED_RR causes it too. If I fire up xmms's gl visualization > > with either policy, X stops getting enough sleep credit to stay at a usable > > priority even when cpu usage is low. Fully repeatable weirdness. See > > attached top snapshots. > >RT tasks are pretty powerfull and should not be used to run everything ;) >What I was seeking with this patch was 1) deterministic latency 2) stave >protection. Yes, I know. I only fired up the cpu hog as a test to see that the protection would kick in. I did do that too though, ran _everything_... the whole X/KDE beast SCHED_SOFTRR for grins :) I should have reported the strangeness in a different thread, it has nothing to do with your patch. -Mike