All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio
Date: 19 Dec 2002 18:53:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1040341995.2521.81.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200212201042.48161.conman@kolivas.net>

On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 18:42, Con Kolivas wrote:

> I guess this explains why my variable timeslice thingy in -ck helps on the 
> desktop. Basically by shortening the timeslice it is masking the effect of 
> the interactivity estimator under load. That is, it is treating the symptoms 
> of having an interactivity estimator rather than tackling the cause.

You would probably get the same effect or better by setting
prio_bonus_ratio lower (or off).

Setting it lower will also give less priority bonus/penalty and not
reinsert the tasks so readily into the active array.

Something like the attached patch may help...

	Robert Love

--- linux-2.5.52/kernel/sched.c	2002-12-19 18:47:53.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c	2002-12-19 18:48:05.000000000 -0500
@@ -66,8 +66,8 @@
 int child_penalty = 95;
 int parent_penalty = 100;
 int exit_weight = 3;
-int prio_bonus_ratio = 25;
-int interactive_delta = 2;
+int prio_bonus_ratio = 5;
+int interactive_delta = 1;
 int max_sleep_avg = 2 * HZ;
 int starvation_limit = 2 * HZ;
 




  reply	other threads:[~2002-12-19 23:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-19 21:50 [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio Con Kolivas
2002-12-19 22:46 ` Robert Love
2002-12-19 23:18   ` Andrew Morton
2002-12-19 23:41     ` Robert Love
2002-12-20  0:02       ` Andrew Morton
2002-12-20  0:15         ` Robert Love
2002-12-20  0:22           ` Con Kolivas
2002-12-20  0:29             ` Robert Love
2002-12-20  0:27       ` Andrew Morton
2002-12-20  2:42         ` Robert Love
2002-12-20  2:48           ` Andrew Morton
2002-12-24 22:26       ` scott thomason
2002-12-25  7:29         ` Con Kolivas
2002-12-25 16:17           ` scott thomason
2002-12-26 15:01             ` scott thomason
2003-01-01  0:31       ` Impact of scheduler tunables on interactive response (was Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio) scott thomason
2003-01-01 16:05         ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-01 17:15           ` scott thomason
2002-12-19 23:42     ` [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio Con Kolivas
2002-12-19 23:53       ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-12-20  0:04         ` Con Kolivas
2002-12-20  0:16           ` Robert Love
2002-12-20 11:17         ` Marc-Christian Petersen
2002-12-20 17:54           ` Robert Love

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1040341995.2521.81.camel@phantasy \
    --to=rml@tech9.net \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.com \
    --cc=conman@kolivas.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.