From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, "Chen,
Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Regression seen for patch "sched:dont decrease idle sleep avg"
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 11:49:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1147859363.8813.41.camel@homer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200605171823.24476.kernel@kolivas.org>
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 18:23 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> There is a ceiling to the priority beyond which tasks that only ever sleep
> for very long periods cannot surpass.
(Hmm. The intent is more clear, ie reserve the top for low latency
tasks,... but that sounds a bit like xmms protection.)
The main problem I see with this ceiling, solely from the interactivity
viewpoint, is that interactive tasks which have started burning cpu
and/or freshly forked interactive tasks land in the same spot. Thud.c
demonstrates this problem quite well. You don't want a few copies of
thud in the same queue with your interactive task, much less above it if
it's used enough cpu to drop a notch or two. Much pain ensues.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-17 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-08 23:18 Regression seen for patch "sched:dont decrease idle sleep avg" Tim Chen
2006-05-09 0:43 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-09 1:07 ` Martin Bligh
2006-05-12 0:04 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-13 12:27 ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-13 13:07 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-14 16:03 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-15 19:01 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-15 23:45 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-16 1:22 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-16 1:44 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-16 4:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-16 23:32 ` Tim Chen
2006-05-17 4:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-17 4:45 ` Peter Williams
2006-05-17 5:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-17 8:23 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-17 9:49 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2006-05-17 10:25 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-17 11:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-17 12:46 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-17 13:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-17 15:10 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-17 17:21 ` Ray Lee
2006-05-17 19:33 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-18 0:35 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-18 1:10 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-18 1:38 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-18 5:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-18 5:52 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-18 7:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-18 12:59 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-19 1:10 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-18 23:17 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-19 1:30 ` [PATCH] sched: fix interactive ceiling code Con Kolivas
2006-05-19 2:02 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-19 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-05-19 14:37 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-19 16:19 ` tim_c_chen
2006-05-18 23:34 ` Regression seen for patch "sched:dont decrease idle sleep avg" Chen, Kenneth W
2006-05-19 1:07 ` Con Kolivas
2006-05-16 4:07 ` Mike Galbraith
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-05-18 4:01 Al Boldi
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=1147859363.8813.41.camel@homer \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox