Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.2 for 2.6.16-rc1 and 2.6.16-rc1-mm1 | | From | Lee Revell <> | | Date | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:59:38 -0500 |
| |
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 21:52 +0100, Paolo Ornati wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:25:37 -0500 > Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote: > > > This seems right to me, how do you expect X to be treated by the > > scheduler? > > Why moving the mouse a little (that causes a microscopic % of CPU > being used) makes X priority jump up to 29 from 6/7 ???
> And why this doesn't happen when glxgears (for example) is running? > (under cpu load this is different, with X never getting "good" > priority -- if I remember correctly) > > Maybe this is normal and depends on the way X sleeps or something... >
Because the scheduler favors interactive tasks (aka those which spend a large % of time waiting on external events) and X is only considered interactive when the mouse is being moved. When glxgears is running it's CPU bound and is therefore penalized.
> I don't know much about schedulers but if I'm able to make the cursor > going in jerks with just a bit of CPU load (linux$ make -j16, for > example) I wonder why X cannot get a better priority... >
Personally I don't see how we can expect to deliver OSX-caliber multimedia performance using only generalized heuristics in the scheduler (other OSes use hooks into the scheduler for multimedia). At the very least it seems you need isochronous scheduling and a multi-threaded X server.
Lee
- 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/
|  |