Re: [RFC][PATCH] O(1) Entitlement Based Scheduler

[Peter Williams <peterw@aurema.com>]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:45:28 +1100
> Peter Williams <peterw@aurema.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>>>Peter Williams <peterw@aurema.com> writes:
>>>
>>>One comment on the patches: could you remove the zillions of numerical Kconfig
>>>options and just make them sysctls? I don't think it makes any sense 
>>>to require a reboot to change any of that. And the user is unlikely
>>>to have much idea yet on what he wants on them while configuring.
>>
>>The default initial values should be fine and the default configuration 
>>allows the scheduling tuning parameters (i.e. half life and time slice 
>>       ) to be changed on a running system via the /proc file system. 
> 
> 
> I'm running the 2.6.3-full patch on my workstation now. No tuning applied
> at all. I reniced the X server to -10. When I have two kernel compiles (without any -j*) 
> running there is  a visible (=not really slow, but long enough to notice something) 
> delay in responses while typing something in a xterm. In sylpheed there
> is the same issue.
> 
> The standard scheduler didn't show this that extreme with only two compiles.
> 

Thanks for the feedback.  We're looking at some minor modifications to 
try and improve this issue.

BTW Could you try it with the X server reniced to -15?

Thanks
Peter
-- 
Dr Peter Williams, Chief Scientist                peterw@aurema.com
Aurema Pty Limited                                Tel:+61 2 9698 2322
PO Box 305, Strawberry Hills NSW 2012, Australia  Fax:+61 2 9699 9174
79 Myrtle Street, Chippendale NSW 2008, Australia http://www.aurema.com