From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - prio_bonus_ratio
Date: 19 Dec 2002 19:15:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1040343306.2519.85.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E025E1A.EA32918A@digeo.com>
On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 19:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
> What Con said. When the scheduler makes an inappropriate decision,
> shortening the timeslice minimises its impact.
OK, I tried it. It does suck.
I wonder why, though, because with the estimator off the scheduler
should not be making "bad" decisions.
> > But that in no way precludes not fixing what we have, because good
> > algorithms should not require tuning for common cases. Period.
>
> hm. Good luck ;)
>
> This is a situation in which one is prepares to throw away some cycles
> to achieve a desired effect.
Well one option would be no algorithm at all :)
But if you can find good values that make things run nice, then perhaps
we just need to change the defaults.
I think we should merge sched-tune..
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-20 0:07 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 [this message]
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
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=1040343306.2519.85.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.