Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 May 2007 09:45:52 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v7 |
| |
* Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com> wrote:
> > i'm pleased to announce release -v7 of the CFS scheduler patchset. > > (The main goal of CFS is to implement "desktop scheduling" with as > > high quality as technically possible.) > : > : > > As usual, any sort of feedback, bugreport, fix and suggestion is > > more than welcome, > > This one seems on par with SD, [...]
excellent :-)
> [...] but there are still some nice issues. > > Try running 3 chew.c's, then renicing one to -10, starves others for > some seconds while switching prio-level. Now renice it back to 10, it > starves for up to 45sec.
ok - to make sure i understood you correctly: does this starvation only occur right when you renice it (when switching prio levels), and it gets rectified quickly once they get over a few reschedules?
> Also, nice levels are only effective on every other step; ie: > ... -3/-2 , -1/0 , 1/2 ... yields only 20 instead of 40 prio-levels.
yeah - this is a first-approximation thing.
Some background: in the upstream scheduler (and in SD) nice levels are linearly scaled, while in CFS they are exponentially scaled. I did this because i believe exponential is more logical: regardless of which nice level a task uses, if it goes +2 nice levels up then it will halve its "fair CPU share". So for example the CPU consumption delta between nice 0 and nice +10 is 1/32 - and so is the delta between -5 and +5, -10 and -5, etc. This makes nice levels _alot_ more potent than upstream's linear approach.
Ingo - 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/
| |