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 19:29:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1040344153.2521.92.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200212201122.59691.conman@kolivas.net>
On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 19:22, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Is it just because the base timeslices are longer than the old scheduler?
Could be. The default timeslice was around 50ms in 2.4. The default in
2.5 with a min of 10 and a max of 300 is about 100ms.
It could be that without the priority boost, 100ms is too long and
capable of starving tasks (which, without the priority boost, are all at
the same level and thus scheduled round-robin).
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-20 0:21 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 [this message]
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=1040344153.2521.92.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox