Re: [PATCH] Staircase scheduler v7.4

Con Kolivas
2004-06-28T15:20:24Z

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
| On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 10:11:22PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
|
|>The design of staircase would make renicing normal interactive things
|>-ve values bad for the latency of other nice 0 tasks s is not
|>recommended for X or games etc. Initial scheduling latency is very
|>dependent on nice value in staircase. If you set a cpu hog to nice -5
|>it will hurt audio at nice 0 and so on.
|>
|
| i think using nice for both cpu share and latency is broken by design ...
| a typical use case on my system: for real-time tv recording i need
| mencoder to get some 80% of the cpu time on average. that means i have
| to nice -<something "big"> it to prevent compiles, flash plugins running
| amok, etc. from making mencoder explode (i.e., overrun buffers). but that
| entirely destroys interactivity; in fact the desktop becomes basically
| unusable.

You want mencoder to use 80% of your cpu and be scheduled fast enough to
not drop frames. Sounds to me like both latency and cpu share are
required, no? And if something uses up 80% of your cpu your
interactivity drops. Why is that a surprise? If something wants lower
latency but doesnt want a lot of cpu, it will only use what it wants. I
don't see a problem here.

If X is not smooth, then that is a problem. This scheduler is still
under development.

Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFA4DcTZUg7+tp6mRURAirZAJ9703erbnS4UikDhpXGn41JuHxaqgCeIshy
099yGuzDyg3BLCEI5/S5xLo=
=xuB1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----