Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Jan 2002 10:54:23 -0200 (BRST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ... |
| |
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Davide Libenzi wrote: > On 2 Jan 2002, Peter Osterlund wrote: > > Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> writes: > > > > > a still lower ts > > > > This also lowers the effectiveness of nice values. In 2.5.2-pre6, if I > > run two cpu hogs at nice values 0 and 19 respectively, the niced task > > will get approximately 20% cpu time (on x86 with HZ=100) and this > > patch will give even more cpu time to the niced task. Isn't 20% too > > much? > > The problem is that with HZ == 100 you don't have enough granularity > to correctly scale down nice time slices. Shorter time slices helps > the interactive feel that's why i'm pushing for this.
So don't give the niced task a new timeslice each time, but only once in a while.
regards,
Rik -- Shortwave goes a long way: irc.starchat.net #swl
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- 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/
| |