Re: bonus inheritance

[Nick Piggin]

Kurt Garloff wrote:

> The patch was written with the goal to improve interactive behaviour.
> It did achieve this. Processes freshly started had a higher bonus thatn
> the background kernel compile processes and thus get woken up.

Hi Kurt,
I'm sorry I can't comment too much on your patch, as I am not
too familiar with 2.6's scheduler policy. Never hurts to have
another pair of eyes looking at it though.

Does it help any actual interactivity problem? Unfortunately
practically any you make to the scheduler is bound to make
things worse for at least one person, so it is difficult to
just test things out.

Maybe we could include a compile (or even boot) time selectable
schedulers to test improvements. Or wait for 2.7 and backport
good bits. These two options still have the problem that most
of the users that matter still won't test them...

That said, if you have any real, reproducable problems that it
solves, you far improve your chances of it being picked up (in
one form or another).

Nick

-
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/