From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Brian Rogers <brian@xyzw.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [BUG] How to get real-time priority using idle priority
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:02:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1231912965.956.11.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090114053106.GA10410@elte.hu>
On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 06:31 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> What about increasing the weight of SCHED_IDLE tasks from 1 to 2 or 3?
> That still makes them mega-nice (which is more than enough), but should
> make the math a lot less borderline.
The weight is currently 2, inv_weight is 1 << 31, which is correct.
I implemented the advance min_vruntime at nice 0 thing, and that seems
to work fine. SCHED_IDLE tasks slam right as they execute, but check
out how _far_ right they slam. This was with the build pinned to cpu 3,
so no migration issues. I'll try weight of 3.
cfs_rq[3]:
.exec_clock : 0.000000
.MIN_vruntime : 281842722.745713
.min_vruntime : 370490.315434
.max_vruntime : 281843966.887081
.spread : 1244.141368
.spread0 : 85467.080507
.nr_running : 6
.load : 12
.nr_spread_over : 0
rt_rq[3]:
.rt_nr_running : 0
.rt_throttled : 0
.rt_time : 0.000000
.rt_runtime : 950.000000
runnable tasks:
task PID tree-key switches prio exec-runtime sum-exec sum-sleep
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
make 29977 281843914.902150 171 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
make 30530 281842722.745713 6 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
gcc 30584 281843921.282161 1 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
sh 30590 281843966.887081 2 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
gcc 30591 281843882.274316 1 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
R cc1 30592 372734.946902 5 120 0 0 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-14 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-11 10:58 [BUG] How to get real-time priority using idle priority Brian Rogers
2009-01-12 5:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-12 13:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-12 13:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-12 15:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-12 15:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-13 1:05 ` Brian Rogers
2009-01-13 2:58 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-14 5:13 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-14 5:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 6:02 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-01-14 7:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 9:28 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-15 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 10:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-15 11:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-15 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 12:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 13:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 13:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 13:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 12:07 ` Brian Rogers
2009-01-12 20:46 ` [patch take 2] " Mike Galbraith
2009-01-12 20:50 ` Mike Galbraith
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=1231912965.956.11.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=brian@xyzw.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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