[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy v7
Martin J. Bligh wrote:

>>I didn't miss 5 revisions, I'll just stick to using my internal
>>numbering for releases.
>>This one has a few changes. Children now get a priority boost
>>on fork, and parents retain more priority after forking a child,
>>however exiting CPU hogs will now penalise parents a bit.
>>Timeslice scaling was tweaked a bit. Oh and remember raising X's
>>priority should _help_ interactivity with this patch, and IMO is
>>not an unreasonable thing to be doing.
>>Please test. I'm not getting enough feedback!
>Well, it's actually a bit faster than either mainline or your previous
>rev whilst running SDET:
>SDET 128 (see disclaimer)
> Throughput Std. Dev
> 2.6.0-test4 100.0% 0.3%
> 2.6.0-test4-nick 102.9% 0.3%
> 2.6.0-test4-nick7a 105.1% 0.5%
>But kernbench is significantly slower. The increase in sys time has
>dropped from last time, but user time is up.
>Kernbench: (make -j vmlinux, maximal tasks)
> Elapsed System User CPU
> 2.6.0-test4 45.87 116.92 571.10 1499.00
> 2.6.0-test4-nick 49.37 131.31 611.15 1500.75
> 2.6.0-test4-nick7a 49.48 125.95 617.71 1502.00

Thanks Martin. OK, so the drop in kernbench is quite likely to be what
I thought - elevated priorities (caused by eg. make waiting for children)
causing timeslices to shrink. As long as its not a fundamental problem,
this should be able to be tweaked back.

Yeah, I guess the random kernel and user times are probably due to cache.

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 13:48    [W:0.063 / U:1.476 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site