From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263475AbUGSU5p (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:57:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263574AbUGSU5p (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:57:45 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([216.238.38.203]:59658 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263475AbUGSU5n (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:57:43 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Path: not-for-mail From: Bill Davidsen Newsgroups: mail.linux-kernel Subject: Re: 2.6.8-rc1-np1 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:00:14 -0400 Organization: TMR Associates, Inc Message-ID: References: <40F8B7C5.9030201@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: gatekeeper.tmr.com 1090270345 6696 192.168.12.100 (19 Jul 2004 20:52:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@tmr.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <40F8B7C5.9030201@yahoo.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Nick Piggin wrote: > http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/2.6.8-rc1-np1/ > > Now that I finally a highmem system, I've been able to make some progress > on the memory management chaneges. Still needs more work though. Feedback > would be nice if anyone is testing. > > Scheduler behaviour is generally pretty good now so I've increased the > timeslice size to see how far I can push it. Some workloads really demand > small timeslices though, so I've added /proc/sys/kernel/base_timeslice. > If you have any problems with the default, please report it to me, and > check if lowering this value helps. > > Things are working alright on my desktop with base_timeslice at 10000 > which corresponds to around 15-20 *second* timeslices, however I don't > do much fancy, and it does have the problem of a newly forked CPU hog > possibly causing a long freeze (fixable by using a smaller value for > the first timeslice). I think most people will find the long freeze worth avoiding, thanks for making it easily adjustable. As I found out when I was evaluating sorts and human interfaces that users would rather use a slower sort which didn't have a "jackpot case" than one which was 30% faster but linear in response. This was for 1-2sec typical response. Just my guess. -- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me