lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Gurus, a silly question for preemptive behavior
Date
jesse writes:

>
> --- Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:
>
>> jesse wrote:
>> > Paulo:
>> >
>> > I already said in the messsage that my user
>> space
>> > application has a low nice priority, i set it to
>> 10.
>> > since my application has low priority compared to
>> > other user space applications, it is supposed to
>> be
>> > interrupted. but it is not.
>>
>> If your task is better priority the scheduler will
>> make it preempt the
>> worse priority task. It sounds to me like you are
>> complaining that the
>> worse priority task is still getting cpu? If so, you
>> misunderstand
>> priority - it orders tasks according to priority
>> giving lower latency
>> and preemptive behaviour to the better task, and
>> gives _more_ cpu but
>> not all the cpu. The cpu must still be shared, but
>> with more cpu
>> distributed to the better priority task. If you want
>> your better
>> priority task to get _all_ the cpu you have to use
>> real time scheduling.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Con
>>
>
> ok, Con, your explaining makes some sense to me , but
> still not very well.
>
> suppose I have five high process: A1, A2, A3, A4,
> A5 all have nice = 0. and I also have a low priority
> process B with nice = 10.
>
> a) when process B is scheduled to run, it is given
> a short time slot based on its priority, for example 5
> secs. because at that point, A1/2/3/4/5 are not
> started yet. B will get CPU and run at full speed.
> b) at the end of time slot(5 secs), scheduler
> finds higher priority A1/A2/A3/A4/A5 are ready,
> scheduler will interrupt process B and starts to pick
> a process from group A, even though B still needs CPU
> cycle.
> c)unfortunately, process A1/2/3/4/5 are so active,
> thus process B should never get opportunity to run
> again, in consequence, CPU Usage% of Process B should
> be very Low.
>
> However, The above theretic assumption is in
> contrary to what i observed. in my LAB, the low
> priority process B seems to hold the CPU forever and
> Top command always shows Process B with a 90% CPU
> usage.
>
> If _more_ cpu but not _all_ the cpu are given to
> Process A1/2/3/4/5, Process B shouldn't have a 90% CPU
> usage.
>
> Thus, i can't help asking why low priority process B
> gets most CPU cycle.

What you are describing is completely wrong behaviour. Please post output of
top running during this workload to demonstrate/prove this is happening.
Easiest thing to do is get your workload running and do 'top -b -n 1 >
top.log' and post top.log please.

Cheers,
Con

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.101 / U:0.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site