public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: as / scheduler question
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:45:52 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F28BB20.6040707@cyberone.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200307290925.10876.kernel@kolivas.org>



Con Kolivas wrote:

>On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 09:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>>Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Nick
>>>
>>>With the sheduler work Ingo and I have been doing I was wondering if
>>>there was possibly a problem with requeuing kernel threads at certain
>>>intervals? Ingo's current version requeues all threads at 25ms and I just
>>>wondered if this number might be a multiple or factor of a magic number
>>>in the AS workings, as we're seeing a few changes in behaviour with AS
>>>only. I'm planning on leaving kernel threads out of this requeuing, but I
>>>thought I could also pick your brain.
>>>
>>What does "requeues all threads at 25ms" mean?
>>
>>The only dependency we should have there is that kblockd should be
>>scheduled promptly after it is woken.  It is reniced by -10 so it should be
>>OK. Renicing it further or making it SCHED_RR/FIFO would be interesting.
>>
>
>Ingo introduced the concept of TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY a while ago. All 
>processes currently running on the active queue get interrupted in their 
>timeslice after TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY (currently set at 25ms and the subject 
>of another thread), and put on the tail of the active array to continue their 
>timeslice after other processes at the same priority on the active queue get 
>to run, also for at most TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY. If kblockd is reniced to -10 
>it wont have a problem unless something else ends up with the same dynamic 
>priority which would only happen if there are interactive tasks reniced to 
>-10. If it's the only process on the active array at that priority it 
>_should_ run unaffected.
>

OK, well if they've been running for more than 6ms then AS goes out of
the picture, so no, shouldn't make a difference.

In general, on the read side, the disk scheduler can determine how
tasks get woken after waiting on reads, and on the write side its more
the request allocation. If CPU bound processes are running as well
though, then its a process scheduler decision about how soon a woken
process gets to run - I think IO performance wants this figure to be
nice and low.



  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-07-31  6:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-07-28 23:08 as / scheduler question Con Kolivas
2003-07-28 23:01 ` Andrew Morton
2003-07-28 23:25   ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-28 23:32     ` Robert Love
2003-07-31  6:43     ` Nick Piggin
2003-07-31  6:45     ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2003-07-28 23:30   ` Robert Love

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=3F28BB20.6040707@cyberone.com.au \
    --to=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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