lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch] sched-2.6.0-test1-G6, interactivity changes
    At 06:42 PM 7/28/2003 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
    >Quoting Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>:
    >
    > > At 09:44 AM 7/28/2003 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > >
    > > >On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Mike Galbraith wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > >Yes I can reproduce it, but we need the Kirk approach and cheat. Some
    > > > > >workaround for tasks that have fallen onto the expired array but
    > > > shouldn't be
    > > > > >there needs to be created. But first we need to think of one before we
    > > can
    > > > > >create one...
    > > > >
    > > > > Oh good, it's not my poor little box. My experimental tree already has
    > > > > a "Kirk" ;-)
    > > >
    > > >could you give -G7 a try:
    > > >
    > > > redhat.com/~mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-2.6.0-test1-G7
    > >
    > > The dd case is improved. The dd if=/dev/zero is now prio 25, but it's
    > > of=/dev/null partner remains at 16. No change with the xmms gl thread.
    >
    >Well O10 is not prone to the dd/of problem (obviously since it doesn't use
    >nanosecond timing [yet?]) but I can exhibit your second weird one if I try
    >hard
    >enough.

    Try setting the gl thread to SCHED_RR. That causes X to lose priority here
    too.

    -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 13:47    [W:2.793 / U:0.080 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site