lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 3/9] CPU controller - Adds timeslice scaling
From
Date
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 11:27 +0900, maeda.naoaki@jp.fujitsu.com wrote:
> Index: linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.17-rc2.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -173,10 +173,17 @@
>
> static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> {
> + unsigned int timeslice;
> +
> if (p->static_prio < NICE_TO_PRIO(0))
> - return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);
> + timeslice = SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);
> else
> - return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE, p->static_prio);
> + timeslice = SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE, p->static_prio);
> +
> + if (!TASK_INTERACTIVE(p))
> + timeslice = cpu_rc_scale_timeslice(p, timeslice);
> +
> + return timeslice;
> }

Why does timeslice scaling become undesirable if TASK_INTERACTIVE(p)?
With this barrier, you will completely disable scaling for many loads.

Is it possible you meant !rt_task(p)?

(The only place I can see scaling as having a large effect is on gobs of
non-sleeping tasks. Slice width doesn't mean much otherwise.)

-Mike

-
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: 2006-04-21 10:18    [W:0.327 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site