![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Hi, On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:22:59AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > The current value, 6ms at 1000HZ, is chosen because it's the largest value > that can schedule a task in less than normal human perceptible range when two > competing heavily cpu bound tasks are the same priority. At 250HZ it works > out to 7.5ms and 10ms at 100HZ. Ironically in my experimenting I found the > cpu cache improvements become much less significant above 7ms so I'm very > happy with this compromise. Heh, this part is *EXACTLY* a fully sufficient explanation of what I was wondering about myself just these days ;) (I'm experimenting with different timeslice values on my P3/450 to verify what performance impact exactly it has) However with a measly 256kB cache it probably doesn't matter too much, I think. But I think it's still important to mention that your perception might be twisted by your P4 limitation (no testing with slower and really slow machines). Andreas - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-04-16 18:47 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||