Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266278AbTIEUjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 16:39:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266297AbTIEUjI (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 16:39:08 -0400 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:27922 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266278AbTIEUi6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 16:38:58 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 13:39:03 -0700 From: Mike Fedyk To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Nick Piggin , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy v12 Message-ID: <20030905203903.GF19041@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: "Martin J. Bligh" , Nick Piggin , linux-kernel References: <3F58CE6D.2040000@cyberone.com.au> <195560000.1062788044@flay> <20030905202232.GD19041@matchmail.com> <207340000.1062793164@flay> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <207340000.1062793164@flay> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1457 Lines: 33 On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 01:19:24PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 11:54:04AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > >> > Backboost is gone so X really should be at -10 or even higher. > >> > >> Wasn't that causing half the problems originally? Boosting X seemed > >> to starve xmms et al. Or do the interactivity changes fix xmms > >> somehow, but not X itself? Explicitly fiddling with task's priorities > >> seems flawed to me. > > > > Wasn't it the larger timeslices with lower nice values in stock and Con's > > patches that made X with nice -10 a bad idea? > > Debian renices X by default to -10 ... I fixed all my desktop interactivity > problems around 2.5.63 timeframe by just turning that off. That was way > before Con's patches. Exactly. Because the larger time slices for lower nice values came from O(1), not Con. > > There may be some more details around this, and I'd love to hear them, > but I fundmantally believe that explitit fiddling with particular > processes because we believe they're somehow magic is wrong (and so > does Linus, from previous discussions). > Linus added a patch to 2.5.65 or so that was supposed to allow nice 0 on X without any detrament. - 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/