Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Oct 2003 10:07:48 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.0-test6 |
| |
Pedro Larroy wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 01:05:36PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > >> >>Pedro Larroy wrote: >> >>>Why not run xmms with SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO? >>> >>> >>> >>Well because playing an mp3 really is a pitiful task for modern CPUs, >>and the standard scheduler should handle this fine. Also a music skip >>isn't terribly important. >> >>Realtime applications are difficult to make robust and they can easily >>hang the system. >> >> > >I think there are better aproaches for deciding when a task should be >interactive than the current one based in how much does the task sleep. > >I'm afraid this selection criteria leads to a scheduler that isn't >predictable for situations that aren't the ones for which is tuned to work. >Of course I may be wrong, but to me, seems that saying explicitly >which tasks are interactive sounds better. >
Have a look at my scheduler if you like. It won't estimate interactivity but it works quite well if you nice -10 your X server. Ie. explicitly state which process should be favoured. http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/v15a/
- 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/
| |