[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [CFT][PATCH] new scheduler policy
At 11:53 AM 8/19/2003 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>As per the latest trend these days, I've done some tinkering with
>the cpu scheduler. I have gone in the opposite direction of most
>of the recent stuff and come out with something that can be nearly
>as good interactivity wise (for me).
>I haven't run many tests on it - my mind blanked when I tried to
>remember the scores of scheduler "exploits" thrown around. So if
>anyone would like to suggest some, or better still, run some,
>please do so. And be nice, this isn't my type of scheduler :P

Ok, I took it out for a quick spin...

Test-starve.c starvation is back (curable via other means), but irman2 is
utterly harmless. Responsiveness under load is very nice until I get to
the "very hefty" end of the spectrum (expected). Throughput is down a bit
at make -j30, and there are many cc1's running at very high priority once
swap becomes moderately busy. OTOH, concurrency for the make -jN in
general appears to be up a bit. X is pretty choppy when moving windows
around, but that _appears_ to be the newer/tamer backboost bleeding a
kdeinit thread a bit too dry. (I think it'll be easy to correct, will let
you know if what I have in mind to test that theory works out). Ending on
a decidedly positive note, I can no longer reproduce priority inversion
troubles with xmms's gl thread, nor with blender.

(/me wonders what the reports from wine/game folks will be like)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.093 / U:0.876 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site