public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Cc: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>,
	rml@tech9.net, mgix@mgix.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about sched_yield()
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:50:26 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D0F72E2.3C854E4@nortelnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.4.44L.0206181422460.12322-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva

Rik van Riel wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Chris Friesen wrote:

> > However, if there is anything else other than the idle task that wants
> > to run, then it should run until it exhausts its timeslice.
> >
> > One process looping on sched_yield() and another one doing calculations
> > should result in almost the entire system being devoted to calculations.
> 
> So if you have a database with 20 threads yielding to each other
> each time a lock is contended and one CPU hog the database should
> be reduced to a very small percentage of the CPU ?

If the database threads are at a higher priority than the cpu hog, then no they
shouldn't.  The one that owns the lock should progress as normal.  Assuming that
only the thread owning the lock progresses, the cpu usage ratio between the
threads as a group and the hog should be roughly equivalent to a single database
thread and a single hog.

We certainly shouldn't thrash the yielding threads and starve the hog.

Chris


-- 
Chris Friesen                    | MailStop: 043/33/F10  
Nortel Networks                  | work: (613) 765-0557
3500 Carling Avenue              | fax:  (613) 765-2986
Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada        | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com

  reply	other threads:[~2002-06-18 17:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-06-15 22:15 Question about sched_yield() mgix
2002-06-16 14:43 ` [patch] " Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18  0:46 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18  0:55   ` Robert Love
2002-06-18  1:51     ` mgix
2002-06-18  3:18     ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18  9:36     ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 16:58       ` Chris Friesen
2002-06-18 17:12         ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-18 17:19           ` mgix
2002-06-18 18:01             ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 18:05               ` mgix
2002-06-18 19:11                 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 16:58                   ` Rob Landley
2002-06-18 19:25                   ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 19:53                     ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:12                       ` mgix
2002-06-18 20:42                         ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:47                           ` mgix
2002-06-18 22:00                             ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:28                           ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 20:08                     ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-19 11:10                     ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 12:04                       ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 22:43               ` Olivier Galibert
2002-06-18 18:21             ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-18 17:13         ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 18:00           ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:45             ` Stevie O
2002-06-19  2:11               ` David Schwartz
2002-06-19  2:52                 ` Stevie O
2002-06-20 20:31               ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 17:23         ` Rik van Riel
2002-06-18 17:50           ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2002-06-18  1:41   ` mgix
2002-06-18  3:21     ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18  3:52       ` mgix
2002-06-18  4:55   ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 11:24     ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 11:47       ` scheduler timeslice distribution, threads, processes. [was: Re: Question about sched_yield()] Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 18:56   ` Question about sched_yield() Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 19:12     ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:19       ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 20:40         ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:42         ` mgix
2002-06-18 22:03           ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:36           ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 11:29     ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 14:03       ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-19 22:25         ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 22:37           ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19  2:10   ` jw schultz

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=3D0F72E2.3C854E4@nortelnetworks.com \
    --to=cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com \
    --cc=davids@webmaster.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgix@mgix.com \
    --cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=rml@tech9.net \
    /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