Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:54:49 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: bonus inheritance |
| |
Kurt Garloff wrote:
> >The patch was written with the goal to improve interactive behaviour. >It did achieve this. Processes freshly started had a higher bonus thatn >the background kernel compile processes and thus get woken up. > >
Hi Kurt, I'm sorry I can't comment too much on your patch, as I am not too familiar with 2.6's scheduler policy. Never hurts to have another pair of eyes looking at it though.
Does it help any actual interactivity problem? Unfortunately practically any you make to the scheduler is bound to make things worse for at least one person, so it is difficult to just test things out.
Maybe we could include a compile (or even boot) time selectable schedulers to test improvements. Or wait for 2.7 and backport good bits. These two options still have the problem that most of the users that matter still won't test them...
That said, if you have any real, reproducable problems that it solves, you far improve your chances of it being picked up (in one form or another).
Nick
- 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/
| |