lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy v12


    Robert Love wrote:

    >On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 16:39, Mike Fedyk wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Exactly. Because the larger time slices for lower nice values came from
    >>O(1), not Con.
    >>
    >
    >The larger timeslices may not help, but one reason why renicing X hurts
    >multimedia is that it gives a preference to the GUI over the multimedia
    >thread(s).
    >
    >Look at it this way. Assume renicing X does not _help_ whatever the
    >problem is (simply because the problem, in this case, is not stemming
    >from X). Then giving X the higher priority and larger timeslice only
    >adversely affects the problem.
    >
    >So, since the multimedia thread in (say) xmms is really unrelated to X
    >(its a separate thread and not doing any Xlib calls), it just hurts it.
    >

    Hi Robert,
    Yeah you are right. Backboost is sort of an implicit renice though,
    except it doesn't always go where you want it or when you want :(

    I have found that is enough to have good scheduling latency to ensure
    xmms skips are difficult to produce.


    -
    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 13:48    [W:0.019 / U:30.840 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site