Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:15:41 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH]O14int |
| |
Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:44, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > >>On Sat, 2003-08-09 at 11:04, Con Kolivas wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:49, Con Kolivas wrote: >>> >>>>More duck tape interactivity tweaks >>>> >>>s/duck/duct >>> >>> >>>>Wli pointed out an error in the nanosecond to jiffy conversion which >>>>may have been causing too easy to migrate tasks on smp (? performance >>>>change). >>>> >>>Looks like I broke SMP build with this. Will fix soon; don't bother >>>trying this on SMP yet. >>> >>Not to be nasty or such, but all these patches have taken >>a very responsive HT box to one that have issues with multiple >>make -j10's running and random jerkyness. >> > >A UP HT box you mean? That shouldn't be capable of running multiple make -j10s >without some noticable effect. Apart from looking impressive, there is no >point in having 30 cpu heavy things running with only 1 and a bit processor >and the machine being smooth as silk; the cpu heavy things will just be >unfairly starved in the interest of appearance (I can do that easily enough). >Please give details if there is a specific issue you think I've broken or >else I wont know about it. >
Yeah make -j10s won't be without impact, but I think for a lot of interactive stuff they don't need a lot of CPU, just to get it in a timely manner. And Martin did say it had been responsive. Sounds like in this case your changes are causing the interactive stuff to get less CPU or higher scheduling latency?
- 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/
| |