From: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
rob@landley.net, Charlie Baylis <cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:57:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F3BE9BD.20304@techsource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200308141659.33447.kernel@kolivas.org
Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:09, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>>William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
>
>>"scale" on which scheduling events should happen, and as tasks become
>>more cpu-bound, they have longer timeslices, so that two cpu-bound
>>tasks of identical priority will RR very slowly and have reduced
>>context switch overhead, but are near infinitely preemptible by more
>>interactive or short-running tasks.
>
>
> Actually the timeslice handed out is purely dependent on the static priority,
> not the priority it is elevated or demoted to by the interactivity estimator.
> However lower priority tasks (cpu bound ones if the estimator has worked
> correctly) will always be preempted by higher priority tasks (interactive
> ones) whenever they wake up.
Ok, so tasks at priority, say, 5 are all run before any tasks at
priority 6, but when a priority 6 task runs, it gets a longer timeslice?
How much longer?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-14 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-04 19:50 [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Charlie Baylis
2003-08-05 2:10 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-05 22:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-06 0:12 ` charlie.baylis
2003-08-06 1:23 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-06 22:24 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-11 8:14 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-11 23:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 0:17 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-12 15:04 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 23:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-13 15:46 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-14 6:09 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 6:59 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 7:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 7:46 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:03 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:40 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:00 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:12 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-17 2:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-17 18:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-08-14 19:57 ` Timothy Miller [this message]
2003-08-15 16:35 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:17 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-16 2:29 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 19:54 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-03 21:19 Voluspa
2003-08-04 2:34 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 10:14 Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-08-03 11:36 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-04 3:06 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:37 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
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=3F3BE9BD.20304@techsource.com \
--to=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=cb-lkml@fish.zetnet.co.uk \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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