Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:54:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:54:21 -0500 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:46520 "HELO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:54:20 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:04:35 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Alan Cox , Jeff Garzik , Andrew Morton , , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] "HT scheduler", sched-2.5.63-B3 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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: 1251 Lines: 32 On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote: > But the proof is in the pudding. Does this actually make things appear > "nicer" to people? Or is it just another wanking session? yes, it would be interesting to see Andrew's experiments redone for the following combinations: - your patch - my patch - both patches in fact my patch was tested and it mostly solved the problem for Andrew, but i'm now convinced that the combination of patches will be the real solution for this class of problems - as that will attack _both_ ends, both CPU hogs are recognized better, and interactivity detection interactivity-distribution is improved. but neither patch solves all problems. The typical DRI game just does nothing but calls the DRI ioctl() and burns CPU time. So i'm convinced we need one more way to help the kernel identify tasks that are important to people - increasing the priority of those tasks programmatically is certainly a workable solution, but there might be other solutions. Ingo - 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/