Message-ID: <3F4DE2C2.20307@cyberone.com.au>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 21:08:50 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030714 Debian/1.4-2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org>
CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy v8
References: <3F4DC208.8050606@cyberone.com.au> <1062068387.1200.1.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com>
In-Reply-To: <1062068387.1200.1.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1202
Lines: 35


Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote:

>On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 10:49, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>
>>No big changes, this one takes some of the steepness out of the
>>timeslice curve and fixes a bug with child priorities which
>>might or might not help startup times. Probably no point doing
>>any benchmarks on it if they've been done on v7.
>>
>
>I've been playing with it for a while and, from what I've seen until
>date, I must say it makes X feel smooth (even when X not reniced,
>although I've reniced it to -20). However, it still feels a little bit
>slower when forking new processes under heavy load. I'll do some
>benchmarking and will post numbers here.
>Thanks!
>

Hi Felipe,
Sorry I can't reply directly to you. Something thinks I'm spam...
Anyway, thanks for all your good feedback. The slower fork response
is something I haven't been able to get quite right without causing
kernel compiles to slow things down _too_ much. I have a few more
ideas though.


-
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/