[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: SMP Affinity and nice
Rich Paredes wrote:

> So since cpumax5 has a lower nice value and thus a higher priority (25 in
> this case), shouldn't it be given it's own cpu. If I give cpumax5 a nice
> value of -20, it does start using it's own cpu.
> My explanation would be that since the scheduler tries to limit cpu
> affinity, the nice value of 0 isn't enough to get the scheduler to move
> this process to another processors run queue. I could be totally wrong
> here though.

I think you are correct. The load balancer doesn't think that this is
enough of an imbalance to go through the effort of swapping two
processes around.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-23 22:57    [W:0.068 / U:31.796 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site