From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261514AbVGLPBF (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:01:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261511AbVGLO7B (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:59:01 -0400 Received: from viper.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.4]:400 "HELO viper.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261493AbVGLO50 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:57:26 -0400 Subject: Re: ondemand cpufreq ineffective in 2.6.12 ? From: Lee Revell To: Con Kolivas Cc: Eric Piel , Ken Moffat , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200507122152.26106.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <42D3AE47.7070208@lifl.fr> <200507122152.26106.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:57:23 -0400 Message-Id: <1121180244.2632.55.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 21:52 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > > Well, it's just the default settings of the kernel which has changed. If > > you want the old behaviour, you can use (with your admin hat): > > echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice > > IMHO it seems quite fair, if you have a process nice'd to 10 it probably > > means you are not in a hurry. > > That's not necessarily true. Most people use 'nice' to have the cpu bound task > not affect their foreground applications, _not_ because they don't care how > long they take. But the scheduler should do this on its own! If people are having to renice kernel compiles to maintain decent interactive performance (and yes, I have to do the same thing sometimes) the scheduler is BROKEN, period. Lee