Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:49:34 +0200 | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |