lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: scheduler nice 19 versus 'idle' behavior / static low-priority scheduling
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 09:50 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 00:49 -0500, Nathanael Hoyle wrote:
    > >
    > > 1) Is my problem 'expected' based on others' understanding of the
    > > current design of the scheduler, or do I have a one-off problem to
    > > troubleshoot here?
    >
    > What kernel are you running (or did my eye glance over that detail in
    > your longish email) ?
    >

    I didn't include it, I should have:

    $ uname -a
    Linux nightmare 2.6.27-gentoo-r7-nhoyle #2 SMP Wed Jan 28 19:04:37 EST
    2009 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz GenuineIntel
    GNU/Linux

    > > 2) Am I overlooking obvious alternative (but clean) fixes?
    >
    > Maybe, we fixed a glaring bug in this department recently (or more even,
    > if you're on older than .28).
    >

    Yep, .27 atm.

    > > 3) Does anyone else see the need for static, but low process priorities?
    >
    > Yep, its rather common.
    >
    > > 4) What is the view of introducing a new scheduler class to handle this?
    >
    > We should have plenty available, SCHED_IDLE should just work -- as
    > should nice 19 for that matter.
    >

    Thanks!
    -Nathanael



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-01-30 10:03    [W:0.022 / U:0.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site