lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: scheduler interactivity - does this patch help?
At 07:39 PM 6/10/2003 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 05:22, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 07:43, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> > > I've had this patch (I think from Ingo) kicking around in -mjb
> > > for a while. I'm going to drop it unless someone thinks it's useful
> > > for some testcase you have ... anyone interested?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > M.
> > >
> > > diff -urpN -X /home/fletch/.diff.exclude 400-reiserfs_dio/kernel/sched.c
> > > 420-sched_interactive/kernel/sched.c ---
> > > 400-reiserfs_dio/kernel/sched.c Fri May 30 19:26:34 2003
> > > +++ 420-sched_interactive/kernel/sched.c Fri May 30 19:28:06 2003
> > > @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@ int node_threshold = 125;
> > > #define STARVATION_LIMIT (starvation_limit)
> > > #define NODE_THRESHOLD (node_threshold)
> > >
> > > +#define TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY (HZ/20 ?: 1)
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * If a task is 'interactive' then we reinsert it in the active
> > > * array after it has expired its current timeslice. (it will not
> > > @@ -1365,6 +1367,27 @@ void scheduler_tick(int user_ticks, int
> > > enqueue_task(p, rq->expired);
> > > } else
> > > enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
> > > + } else {
> > > + /*
> > > + * Prevent a too long timeslice allowing a task to monopolize
> > > + * the CPU. We do this by splitting up the timeslice into
> > > + * smaller pieces.
> > > + *
> > > + * Note: this does not mean the task's timeslices expire or
> > > + * get lost in any way, they just might be preempted by
> > > + * another task of equal priority. (one with higher
> > > + * priority would have preempted this task already.) We
> > > + * requeue this task to the end of the list on this priority
> > > + * level, which is in essence a round-robin of tasks with
> > > + * equal priority.
> > > + */
> > > + if (!(p->time_slice % TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY) &&
> > > + (p->array == rq->active)) {
> > > + dequeue_task(p, rq->active);
> > > + set_tsk_need_resched(p);
> > > + p->prio = effective_prio(p);
> > > + enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
> > > + }
> > > }
> > > out_unlock:
> > > spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> >
> > I'm currently testing it on a modified 2.5.70-mm6 kernel (with HZ set to
> > 1000) and seems to help a little with XMMS's chunky audio playback when
> > X is reniced to -20.
>
>I tried this patch way back when mingo first posted it and found it helped a
>little. Have a close look at it, though; all it does is limit max timeslice
>to 50ms when other tasks are running at the same priority. A better effect
>can and is obtained by changing max_timeslice to 50ms...

It also drops priority somewhat sooner. If you reduce max to 50ms, normal
task timeslice becomes tiny, which won't do anything good for throughput.

-Mike

-
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 13:36    [W:0.029 / U:4.188 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site