Re: SMP Affinity and nice

[Chris Friesen]

Rich Paredes wrote:

> So since cpumax5 has a lower nice value and thus a higher priority (25 in
> this case), shouldn't it be given it's own cpu.   If I give cpumax5 a nice
> value of -20, it does start using it's own cpu.
>
> My explanation would be that since the scheduler tries to limit cpu
> affinity, the nice value of 0 isn't enough to get the scheduler to move
> this process to another processors run queue.  I could be totally wrong
> here though.

I think you are correct.  The load balancer doesn't think that this is 
enough of an imbalance to go through the effort of swapping two 
processes around.

Chris
-
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/