Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263250AbTFXSHW (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:07:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263176AbTFXSHL (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:07:11 -0400 Received: from tmr-02.dsl.thebiz.net ([216.238.38.204]:36369 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262299AbTFXSEs (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:04:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:12:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Davidsen To: Helge Hafting cc: LKML Subject: Re: O(1) scheduler & interactivity improvements In-Reply-To: <20030623164743.GB1184@hh.idb.hist.no> 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: 1165 Lines: 28 On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Helge Hafting wrote: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:18:29PM +0200, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: > > I don't consider compiling the kernel an interactive process as it's > > done almost automatically without any user intervention. XMMS is not a > > complete interactive application as it spends most of the time decoding > > and playing sound. > > > A kernel compile isn't interactive - sure. It may get some boosts > anyway for io waiting. This quite correctly puts it above a > pure cpu hog like a mandelbrot calculation. Why? Not why does the scheduler do that, but why *should* a compile be in any way more deserving that a Mandelbrot? It isn't obvious to me that either are interacting with the user, and if they are it would be the Mandelbrot doing realtime display. -- bill davidsen CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - 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/