From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271808AbTGRPca (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 11:32:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271799AbTGRPby (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 11:31:54 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20]:24980 "HELO mail.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S271777AbTGRPa4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 11:30:56 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20030718174802.01b168a0@pop.gmx.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 17:50:07 +0200 To: Con Kolivas From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCH] O6int for interactivity Cc: Nick Piggin , Davide Libenzi , linux kernel mailing list , Andrew Morton , Felipe Alfaro Solana , Zwane Mwaikambo In-Reply-To: <200307190024.08571.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030718120229.01a8fcf0@pop.gmx.net> <5.2.1.1.2.20030718071656.01af84d0@pop.gmx.net> <5.2.1.1.2.20030718120229.01a8fcf0@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 12:24 AM 7/19/2003 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: >On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:18, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > At 04:34 PM 7/18/2003 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > >Mike Galbraith wrote: > > That _might_ (add salt) be priorities of kernel threads dropping too low. > >Is there any good reason for the priorities of kernel threads to vary at all? >In the original design they are subject to the same interactivity changes as >other processes and I've maintained that but I can't see a good reason for it >and plan to change it unless someone tells me otherwise. They're so light now days that I never see them change. I set bonus manually to MAX_BONUS/2 in the last numbers posted. -Mike