lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] O17int
At 09:59 AM 8/22/2003 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
>Quoting Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>:
>
> > > > The most generally effective form of the "down-shift" anti-starvation
> > > > tactic that I've tried, is to periodically check the head of all queues
> > > > below current position (can do very quickly), and actively select the
> > > > oldest task who hasn't run since some defined deadline. Queues are
> > > > serviced based upon priority most of the time, and based upon age some
> > of
> > > > the time.
> > >
> > >Hmm also sounds fudgy.
> >
> > Yeah. I crossbred it with a ~deadline scheduler, and created a mutt.
>
>But how did this mutt perform?

At the time, I was more concerned by the very long semaphore hold times I
was seeing than anything else. That it helped quite a lot. It didn't hurt
throughput in any way I could see, and it improved irman's latency
numbers. (process load was routinely hitting ~1.5 seconds max latency at
the time, that tree cut it to roughly 400-500ms iirc) Just like anything
else that increases fairness though, it hurt X feel somewhat in the
presence of load.

-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:0.099 / U:1.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site