From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
rob@landley.net, Charlie Baylis <cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:57:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F3BE9BD.20304@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200308141659.33447.kernel@kolivas.org
Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:09, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>>William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>
>>"scale" on which scheduling events should happen, and as tasks become
>>more cpu-bound, they have longer timeslices, so that two cpu-bound
>>tasks of identical priority will RR very slowly and have reduced
>>context switch overhead, but are near infinitely preemptible by more
>>interactive or short-running tasks.
>
>
> Actually the timeslice handed out is purely dependent on the static priority,
> not the priority it is elevated or demoted to by the interactivity estimator.
> However lower priority tasks (cpu bound ones if the estimator has worked
> correctly) will always be preempted by higher priority tasks (interactive
> ones) whenever they wake up.
Ok, so tasks at priority, say, 5 are all run before any tasks at
priority 6, but when a priority 6 task runs, it gets a longer timeslice?
How much longer?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-14 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-04 19:50 [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Charlie Baylis
2003-08-05 2:10 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-05 22:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-06 0:12 ` charlie.baylis
2003-08-06 1:23 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-06 22:24 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-11 8:14 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-11 23:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 0:17 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-12 15:04 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 23:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-13 15:46 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-14 6:09 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 6:59 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 7:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 7:46 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:03 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:40 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:00 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:12 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-17 2:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-17 18:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-08-14 19:57 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
2003-08-15 16:35 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:17 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-16 2:29 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 19:54 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-03 21:19 Voluspa
2003-08-04 2:34 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 10:14 Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-08-03 11:36 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-04 3:06 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:37 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
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=3F3BE9BD.20304@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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.