Messages in this thread | | | From | "John Yau" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Minor scheduler fix to get rid of skipping in xmms | Date | Sun, 7 Sep 2003 13:30:58 -0400 |
| |
> > Its actually more important when you have smaller timeslices, because > the interactive task is more likely to use all of its timeslice in a > burst of activity, then getting stuck behind all the cpu hogs. >
Well, I didn't claim it'd be optimal, I just said that it's not worth the extra effort. The interactive task will still finish in O((interactive_time / timeslice) * #hogs + interative_time) ms. As long as the cpu time interactive tasks require are very short, they still should finish within a reasonable amount of time.
> > > > Yes. Also, say 5 hogs running, an interactive task needs to do something > taking 2ms. At a 2ms timeslice, it will take 2ms. At a 1ms timeslice it > will take 6ms. >
That's assuming that the interactive task gets scheduled first. In the worst case scenario where it gets scheduled last, at 2 ms, it takes 12 ms and at 1 ms it also takes 12 ms. Not much difference there.
- 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/
| |