Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:51:19 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [3/11] issue 3: No understanding of potential cpu capacity |
| |
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:39:54PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > Responsiveness is still very important. It is quite hard to control. CFS > doesn't consider latency. The only way to get the best responsiveness is > to go for best performance which comes at a high cost in energy.
The big problem is that the normal unix task model doesn't cover his at all -- nice isn't much of a knob.
There's ways in which you can adapt CFS to include such a measure (search for the EEVDF patches), but I was kinda hoping that tasks that really desire responsiveness could be made to use SCHED_DEADLINE or such.
| |