lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subjectconstants for goodness calculation
Date
I wonder if we can make the following change in the goodness code for the
following 2 reasons.

(1) It would be more consistent with PROC_CHANGE_PENALTY in regarding to
goodness calculation.

(2) It would be easier to tweak these two constants in architecture
dependent code instead of generic code. The constants varies a lot from
platform to platform and instead of one constant for all platform, it is
easier for each platform to tailor optimal number in architecture code.

Any comments or objection? If no, then I will generate a patch set to
include changes for all platforms. One other question, what is the standard
procedure to send patch to Linus or Alan for consideration? Thanks.


diff -Nur linux.orig/include/asm-i386/smp.h linux/include/asm-i386/smp.h
--- linux.orig/include/asm-i386/smp.h Mon Nov 5 12:42:14 2001
+++ linux/include/asm-i386/smp.h Wed Nov 14 15:22:32 2001
@@ -130,6 +130,7 @@
*/

#define PROC_CHANGE_PENALTY 15 /* Schedule penalty */
+#define MM_CHANGE_PENALTY 1

#endif
#endif
diff -Nur linux.orig/kernel/sched.c linux/kernel/sched.c
--- linux.orig/kernel/sched.c Wed Oct 17 14:14:37 2001
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c Wed Nov 14 15:21:27 2001
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@

/* .. and a slight advantage to the current MM */
if (p->mm == this_mm || !p->mm)
- weight += 1;
+ weight += MM_CHANGE_PENALTY;
weight += 20 - p->nice;
goto out;
}
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.428 / U:0.960 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site