From: Nathanael Hoyle <nhoyle@hoyletech.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scheduler nice 19 versus 'idle' behavior / static low-priority scheduling
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:52:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1233298321.17301.18.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1233296647.6071.15.camel@marge.simson.net>
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 07:24 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 00:49 -0500, Nathanael Hoyle wrote:
>
> > Recently I installed the Folding@Home client, which many of you may be
> > familiar with, intended to utilize spare CPU cycles to perform protein
> > folding simulations in order to further medical research. It is not a
> > multi-threaded client at this point, so it simply runs four instances on
> > my system, since it has four cores. It is configured to run at
> > nice-level 19.
> >
> > Because it is heavily optimized, and needs little external data to
> > perform its work, it spends almost all of its time cpu-bound, with
> > little to no io-wait or blocking on network calls, etc. I had been
> > using it for about a week with no real difficulty until I went to watch
> > another DVD and found that the video was slightly stuttery/jerky so long
> > as foldingathome was running in the background. Once I shut it down,
> > the video playback resumed its normal smooth form.
>
> Sounds like a problem was recently fixed. Can you try 2.6.29-rc3 or
> 2.6.28.2?
>
> -Mike
>
I will try to do so as soon as I get the chance. Do you have any
specific info on the problem that you believe was fixed and/or the fix
applied?
Thanks,
-Nathanael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-30 6:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-30 5:49 scheduler nice 19 versus 'idle' behavior / static low-priority scheduling Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 6:16 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-30 6:40 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 7:21 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-30 7:59 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 8:07 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-30 8:55 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 9:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-30 22:12 ` Brian Rogers
2009-01-31 5:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-31 9:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-02-02 23:57 ` [stable] " Greg KH
2009-02-09 15:19 ` Brian Rogers
2009-02-09 15:51 ` Greg KH
2009-01-30 8:16 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 13:56 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-30 14:15 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-30 6:17 ` V.Radhakrishnan
2009-01-30 6:48 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 14:15 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-30 6:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-30 6:52 ` Nathanael Hoyle [this message]
2009-01-30 7:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-30 8:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 9:00 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 9:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 10:18 ` Nathanael Hoyle
2009-01-30 10:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-30 10:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-30 10:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-02-02 17:23 ` Lennart Sorensen
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=1233298321.17301.18.camel@localhost \
--to=nhoyle@hoyletech.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--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