From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266054AbTHOQi4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:38:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270013AbTHOQf1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:35:27 -0400 Received: from c210-49-248-224.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:35013 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266054AbTHOQbr (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:31:47 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Timothy Miller , William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 02:38:05 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20030804195058.GA8267@cray.fish.zetnet.co.uk> <20030814070119.GN32488@holomorphy.com> <3F3BEA65.8080907@techsource.com> In-Reply-To: <3F3BEA65.8080907@techsource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308160238.05185.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 06:00, Timothy Miller wrote: > If my guess from my previous email was correct (that is pri 5 gets > shorter timeslide than pri 6), then that means that tasks of higher > static priority have are penalized more than lower pri tasks for expiring. > > Say a task has to run for 15ms. If it's at a priority that gives it a > 10ms timeslice, then it'll expire and get demoted. If it's at a > priority that gives it a 20ms timeslice, then it'll not expire and > therefore get promoted. > > Is that fair? Yes, it's a simple cutoff at the end of the timeslice. If you use up the timeslice allocated to you, then you have to pass a test to see if you can go onto the active array or get expired. Since higher static priority (lower nice) tasks get longer timeslices, they are less likely to expire unless they are purely cpu bound and never sleep. Con