The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes are
not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
WARNING: this obvious breaks any userland tools that expected 'ignore_nice'
to exist, to draw attention to this fact it was concluded on the mailing list
that the entry should be removed altogether so the userland app breaks and so
the author can build simple to detect workaround. Having said that it seems
currently very few tools even make use of this functionality; all I could
find was a Gentoo Wiki entry.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Clouter <[email protected]>
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:11, Alexander Clouter wrote:
> The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
> are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet
to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default
for ondemand.
Regards,
Con
Con,
Con Kolivas <[email protected]> [20051111 02:48:57 +1100]:
>
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:11, Alexander Clouter wrote:
> > The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> > This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> > 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
> > are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
>
> And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet
> to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default
> for ondemand.
>
....resubmitting with alternative defaults....
Cheers
Alex
> Regards,
> Con
--
____________________________________
/ "An ounce of prevention is worth a \
\ pound of purge." /
------------------------------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
Hi!
> > The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> > This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> > 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
> > are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
>
> And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet
> to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default
> for ondemand.
Me. I have graphics appp here (almara), that does user interaction in
separate thread from real workers. Yet you want real workers to run...
And consider notebook on ac power, using ondemand for acoustic management.
--
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:11, Alexander Clouter wrote:
>> The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
>> This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
>> 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
>> are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
>
> And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet
> to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default
> for ondemand.
i think that 1 is the correct default for ondemand.
And i know that discussion is fruitless - everybody has its own
preference, i prefer battery runtime before almost everything else :-)
--
Stefan Seyfried \ "I didn't want to write for pay. I
QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices \ wanted to be paid for what I write."
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, N?rnberg \ -- Leonard Cohen
On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 03:11:11PM +0000, Alexander Clouter wrote:
> The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes are
> not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
>
> WARNING: this obvious breaks any userland tools that expected 'ignore_nice'
> to exist, to draw attention to this fact it was concluded on the mailing list
> that the entry should be removed altogether so the userland app breaks and so
> the author can build simple to detect workaround. Having said that it seems
> currently very few tools even make use of this functionality; all I could
> find was a Gentoo Wiki entry.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Clouter <[email protected]>
> diff -r -u -d linux-2.6.14-rc2.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c \
> linux-2.6.14-rc2/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c
> --- linux-2.6.14-rc2.orig/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c 2005-10-03 \
> 20:05:30.742334750 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.14-rc2/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c 2005-10-06 \
> 21:10:47.785133750 +0100 @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@
> {
This patch is horribly word-wrapped. Please resend.
Dave