From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261367AbVGLL5a (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:57:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261351AbVGLLy6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:54:58 -0400 Received: from mail25.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.133.166]:44762 "EHLO mail25.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261346AbVGLLwy (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:52:54 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Eric Piel Subject: Re: ondemand cpufreq ineffective in 2.6.12 ? Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:52:23 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.1 Cc: Ken Moffat , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <42D3AE47.7070208@lifl.fr> In-Reply-To: <42D3AE47.7070208@lifl.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5552441.4FEbOI5BtM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200507122152.26106.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart5552441.4FEbOI5BtM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:49, Eric Piel wrote: > 07/12/2005 01:11 PM, Ken Moffat wrote/a =C3=A9crit: > > On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Ken Moffat wrote: > >> I was going to say that niceness didn't affect what I was doing, but > >>I've just rerun it [ in 2.6.11.9 ] and I see that tar and bzip2 show up > >>with a niceness of 10. I'm starting to feel a bit out of my depth here > > > > OK, Con was right, and I didn't initially make the connection. > > > > In 2.6.11, untarring a .tar.bz2 causes tar and bzip2 to run with a > > niceness of 10, but everything is fine. > > > > In 2.6.12, ondemand _only_ has an effect for me in this example if I > > put on my admin hat and renice the bzip2 process (tried 0, that works) - > > renicing the tar process has no effect (obviously, that part doesn't > > push the processor). > > > > So, from a user's point of view it's broken. > > Well, it's just the default settings of the kernel which has changed. If > you want the old behaviour, you can use (with your admin hat): > echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice > IMHO it seems quite fair, if you have a process nice'd to 10 it probably > means you are not in a hurry. That's not necessarily true. Most people use 'nice' to have the cpu bound t= ask=20 not affect their foreground applications, _not_ because they don't care how= =20 long they take. I nice my kernel compiles and keep web browsing etc (actual= ly=20 I run them SCHED_BATCH but this has the same effect with the default ondema= nd=20 governor now). > > Just by couriosity, I wonder how your processes are automatically > reniced to 10 ? Shell environment settings. Cheers, Con --nextPart5552441.4FEbOI5BtM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBC0676ZUg7+tp6mRURAqklAKCQJo2rzbVynqyu1O1ih9tNw5jUuQCffcNI LIhU/1YkM7Du2DFhJYxM83o= =0nwC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5552441.4FEbOI5BtM--