lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subject[patch] O(1) scheduler, -I1

On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Davide Libenzi wrote:

> > - RT scheduling is broken.
>
> Why ?

RR tasks were queued to the expired array.

> [...] Ingo, IMHO is not correct to give time slices depending on
> priority and we should return to the old TS(nice) behavior.

i agree - but your new patch is broken still, you have the timeslice range
inverted(!) :-)

but never mind, i've fixed this and added the code to -I1, check it out
at:

http://redhat.com/~mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-O1-2.5.2-final-I1.patch

(for the record, i've tested -I1 on SMP and UP as well.)

-I1 also includes a fix from Dave Jones: mmu_context.h was still included
in arch/i386/kernel/process.c.

> [...] IMVHO is not correct to have new tasks to fully inherit parent
> priority because :

i fully agree - in -I0 i have kept the 'child gets 10% less priority than
parent' rule. This works really well in fork-bomb situations, i've tested
this with -I0. (and -I1 as well.) It also works well with interactive
shells, which want to start processes which will inherit *some* of their
parent's priority, but not all of it.

> 2) if an interactive task is born we do not need an immediate priority
> boost

Think about starting a simple 'ls' under X if under some high load. This
works just fine under 2.5.2-vanilla and 2.5.2-I0 as well. We should give
the task a chance to finish within ... 500 or 1000 msecs (or so), most
shell commands that fork do so.

> 3) if a cpu bound task born from an interactive task ( very very common )
> it'll make a long run on the cpu before falling in the hell of cpu
> bound tasks
>
> I've also decreased the minimum time slice to 10ms and increased the
> max to 160ms and this should cast back niced tasks to low cpu usages.

(i've done this already in -I0, based on earlier comments of yours.)

> I'm using it in my desk and just to have fun i keep running make -j20
> in background:-)

please re-test this with -I1. (i've tested it and it works just fine, but
more testing cannot hurt.)

are there any other items in your patch that are not yet in -I1?

Ingo

-
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 13:23    [W:0.045 / U:0.808 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site