Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2002 03:06:50 +0100 (CET) | Subject | Re: [patch] O(1) scheduler-H6/H7/I0 and nice +19 | From | Rene Rebe <> |
| |
Hi.
I3 still shows exactly the same behavior. For a test I simply compiled ALSA and executed xstart. The screen went black (for a minute?) and continued to start when ALSA finished.
Also dragging a xterm arround (during a compilation) results in 1-2 frames/per second refresh.
The lst one I tried was sched-patch was G1, it worked fine.
Athlon XP 1700+, SiS735, 512MB RAM, Matrox-G450 ...
From: Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org> Subject: Re: [patch] O(1) scheduler-H6/H7/I0 and nice +19 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:44:51 -0500
> On January 15, 2002 08:49 pm, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > > The 2.4.17-I0 patch makes things much better here. Does this one > > > suffer from the same bugs that the 2.5.2 version has? > > > > i'll do a -I3 patch in a minute. > > > > > Major difference from older version of the patch is that top shows > > > many processes with PRI 0. I am not sure this is intended? > > > > yes, it's intended. Lots of interactive (idle) tasks. Right now the time > > under which we detect a task as interactive is pretty short, but if you > > run 'top' with 's 0.3' then you can see how tasks grow/shrink their > > priorities, depending on the load they generate. > > OK I3 also works fine with respect to my nice test. One thing I do note > and I am not too sure how it might be fixed, is what happens when starting > what will be interactive programs. > > Watching with top 's 0.3' I can see them lose priority in the 3-10 seconds it > takes them to setup. This is not that critical if they are the only thing trying > to run. If you have another (not niced) task eating cpu (like a kernel compile) > then intactive startup time suffers. Startup time is wait time that _is_ noticed > by users. > > Is there some way we could tell the scheduler or the scheduler could learn that > a given _program_ is usually interactive so it should wait at bit (10 seconds on my > box would work) before starting to increase its priority numbers? > > TIA > Ed Tomlinson > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |