Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:55:12 -0400 | From | Ed Sweetman <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.0-test6 |
| |
Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Rob Landley wrote: > >> On Sunday 28 September 2003 02:03, Con Kolivas wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 11:27, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> >>>> from Andrew Morton. Most notably perhaps Con's scheduler changes that >>>> have been discussed extensively and made it into the -mm tree for >>>> testing. >>>> >>> For those who are trying this for the first time, please note that the >>> scheduler has been tuned to tell the difference between tasks of the >>> _same_ >>> nice level. This means do NOT renice X or it will make audio skip unless >>> you also renice your audio application by the same amount. Lots of >>> distributions have done this for the old 2.4 scheduler which could not >>> treat equal "nice" levels as differently as the new scheduler does >>> and 2.6 >>> shouldn't need special treatment. >>> >>> So for testing note the following points: >>> >>> Make sure X is NOT reniced to -10 as many distributions are doing. >>> Some shells spawn processes at nice +5 by default and this will make >>> audio >>> apps suffer. >>> Make sure your hard disk, graphics card and audio card are performing at >>> equal standard to your 2.4 kernel (ie dma is working, graphics is fully >>> accelerated etc). >>> >> >> I.E. with your new scheduler, priority levels actually have enough of >> an effect now that things that aren't reniced can be noticeably >> starved by things that are. >> > > AFAIK, Con's scheduler doesn't change the nice implementation at all. > Possibly some of his changes amplify its problems, or, more likely they > remove most other scheduler problems leaving this one noticable. > > If X is running at -20, and xmms at +19, xmms is supposed to still get > 5% of the CPU. Should be enough to run fine. Unfortunately this is > achieved by giving X very large timeslices, so xmms's scheduling latency > becomes large. The interactivity bonuses don't help, either. >
there are 40 positions between -20 and 19, that doesn't equal 5% steps. They don't even refer to % of cpu. If i nice a process to -20 it doesn't get a given percentage of cpu just because it's -20. I may have other processes at -20 as well. If you nice something to -20 and it is actually using that cpu then things that are +19 shouldn't run and wont run. If I nice -20 vmstat 1, it's not going to starve xmms (or any better audio player). -20 means starve all and it should do that when it actually makes use of the resources.
- 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/
| |