Re: [RFC][PATCH] O(1) Entitlement Based Scheduler

[Peter Williams]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:45:28 +1100
> Peter Williams <peterw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > Peter Williams <peterw@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > >
> > > One comment on the patches: could you remove the zillions of numerical Kconfig
> > > options and just make them sysctls? I don't think it makes any sense 
> > > to require a reboot to change any of that. And the user is unlikely
> > > to have much idea yet on what he wants on them while configuring.
> >
> > The default initial values should be fine and the default configuration 
> > allows the scheduling tuning parameters (i.e. half life and time slice 
> >       ) to be changed on a running system via the /proc file system. 
>
>
> I'm running the 2.6.3-full patch on my workstation now. No tuning applied
> at all. I reniced the X server to -10. When I have two kernel compiles (without any -j*) 
> running there is  a visible (=not really slow, but long enough to notice something) 
> delay in responses while typing something in a xterm. In sylpheed there
> is the same issue.
>
> The standard scheduler didn't show this that extreme with only two compiles.

Thanks for the feedback.  We're looking at some minor modifications to 
try and improve this issue.

BTW Could you try it with the X server reniced to -15?

Thanks
Peter
--
Dr Peter Williams, Chief Scientist                peterw@xxxxxxxxxx
Aurema Pty Limited                                Tel:+61 2 9698 2322
PO Box 305, Strawberry Hills NSW 2012, Australia  Fax:+61 2 9699 9174
79 Myrtle Street, Chippendale NSW 2008, Australia http://www.aurema.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/