lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans