Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:09:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:09:00 -0500 Received: from 5-106.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.163.106]:28310 "EHLO 5-106.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:08:59 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:16:01 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Kurt=20Johnson?= cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: small doubt about fair-scheduler patch In-Reply-To: <20021202192553.87887.qmail@web13204.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 992 Lines: 30 On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Kurt Johnson wrote: > Im using your fair scheduler patch (2.4.19-fairsched), > Without the fairsched patch, ps output is normal, eg, > init is always the first process listed, > Im just wondering, is this > purely aesthetically or is there something fishy? The fairsched patch reorders processes on the tasklist so that the processes of a user all get CPU time alternately. It's just a cosmetic issue, caused by the fact that procfs walks that same list to display all the tasks and now that list can get reordered ... regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://guru.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: october@surriel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/