Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:33:26 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [patch] O(1) scheduler-H6/H7 and nice +19 |
| |
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> On January 14, 2002 08:50 pm, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > > On January 13, 2002 10:45 pm, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > > > > With pre3+H7, kernel compiles still take 40% longer with a setiathome > > > > > process running at nice +19. This is _not_ the case with the old > > > > > scheduler. > > > > > > > > Did you try to set MIN_TIMESLICE to 10 ( sched.h ) ?make bzImage with > > > > setiathome running nice +19 > > > > > > This makes things a worst - note the decreased cpu utilizaton... > > > > > > make bzImage 424.33s user 32.21s system 48% cpu 15:48.69 total > > > > > > What is this telling us? > > > > Doh ! > > Did you set this ? > > > > #define MIN_TIMESLICE (10 * HZ / 1000) > > I set: > > #define MIN_TIMESLICE 10 > > Now I am tring > > #define MIN_TIMESLICE 1 > > which, looksing at monitors, gives about 80% cpu to the compile
try to replace :
PRIO_TO_TIMESLICE() and RT_PRIO_TO_TIMESLICE() with :
#define NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(n) (MIN_TIMESLICE + ((MAX_TIMESLICE - \ MIN_TIMESLICE) * ((n) + 20)) / 39)
NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(p->__nice)
I'm currently running it on my machine but i don't want that this changes that 'liquid' interactive feel that me and Ingo have got with the new code
- Davide
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |