Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 3 Jan 2002 09:36:56 -0800 (PST) | | From | Davide Libenzi <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ... |
| |
On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On 2 Jan 2002, Peter Osterlund wrote: > > > Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> writes: > > > > > > > a still lower ts > > > > > > This also lowers the effectiveness of nice values. In 2.5.2-pre6, if I > > > run two cpu hogs at nice values 0 and 19 respectively, the niced task > > > will get approximately 20% cpu time (on x86 with HZ=100) and this > > > patch will give even more cpu time to the niced task. Isn't 20% too > > > much? > > > > The problem is that with HZ == 100 you don't have enough granularity > > to correctly scale down nice time slices. Shorter time slices helps > > the interactive feel that's why i'm pushing for this. > > So don't give the niced task a new timeslice each time, > but only once in a while.
Rik, this is part of the new architecture where tasks can spend the virtual time they accumulated ( if any, dyn_prio > 0 ) one extra slice at a time. This help in separating the time slice from the dynamic priority.
- Davide
- 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/
|  |