public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jason mclaughlin <mcjason@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fixed timeslice
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 17:17:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1242055079.11251.282.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8bfdd4d60905110658g186bc26el703eb1baf076616e@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 09:58 -0400, Jason mclaughlin wrote:
> can't scheduling be unfair when a fixed timeslice is used as the time
> up til a process can run?
> 
> won't it work out that if a program is using the harddrive, and
> another is using cpu time and using up it's timeslices, that the
> cpu user will give less runtime opportunity to the harddrive user
> because of a wait up until timeslice to use the harddrive again?
> 
> like, doesn't the length of a timeslice change the fairness of
> scheduling opportunity for harddrive use?
> 
> can't it span the time that something is ready to take from the
> harddrive, til the time the harddrive can be used again?
> 
> can't it anyways in some cases though no matter what, because of how
> using up til a timeslice is available sometimes when something wants
> to use the harddrive again,
> and because what wants to use the harddrive can be behind what uses a
> whole timeslice?

I'm rather confused. If a task is blocked on IO its not contending for
CPU resources and is thus irrelevant to the running tasks and their
fairness.

Also, only SCHED_RR has a fixed timeslice.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-11 15:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-11 13:58 fixed timeslice Jason mclaughlin
2009-05-11 15:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-05-15 12:47 ` Jason mclaughlin

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=1242055079.11251.282.camel@twins \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcjason@gmail.com \
    --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