Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Oct 2015 21:54:21 +1100 | From | paul.szabo@sydney ... | Subject | Re: CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks |
| |
Dear Mike,
> I see a fairness issue ... but one opposite to your complaint.
Why is that opposite? I think it would be fair for the one pert process to get 100% CPU, the many oink processes can get everything else. That one oink is lowly 10% (when others are 100%) is of no consequence.
What happens when you un-pin pert: does it get 100%? What if you run two perts? Have you reproduced my observations?
---
Good to see that you agree on the fairness issue... it MUST be fixed! CFS might be wrong or wasteful, but never unfair.
Cheers, Paul
Paul Szabo psz@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/ School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Australia
| |