Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/9] CPU controller - Adds timeslice scaling | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:17:29 +0200 |
| |
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/
| |