Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262435AbVESG6O (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2005 02:58:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262440AbVESG6O (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2005 02:58:14 -0400 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.199]:6679 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262435AbVESG6I convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2005 02:58:08 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=et0guOfjrXE/0h9SCwlJeAlRQlKk8g/vJqvJgnBF0ghVR5SOsmjJVR44q5SPz01OV1ZElVuOnJMR6n/UUW2pALY49Ecf07BCKsFjDCrkodciXJNsV2c9TxalkmQjOMViyMj/7gVd72r3bVjA5ltfwCOiM5WofeYE5ILaeeHpjn0= Message-ID: <377362e1050518235812f1cbbb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 15:58:07 +0900 From: "Tetsuji \"Maverick\" Rai" Reply-To: "Tetsuji \"Maverick\" Rai" To: Con Kolivas Subject: Re: HT scheduler: is it really correct? or is it feature of HT? Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200505190756.16413.kernel@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <377362e10505181142252ec930@mail.gmail.com> <200505190756.16413.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1283 Lines: 29 On 5/19/05, Con Kolivas wrote: > ------------snip--------------- > Hyperthread sibling cpus share cpu power. If you let a nice 19 task run full > power on the sibling cpu of a nice 0 task it will drain performance from the > nice 0 task and make it run approximately 40% slower. The only way around > this is to temporarily make the sibling run idle so that a nice 0 task gets > the appropriate proportion of cpu resources compared to a nice 19 task. It is > intentional and quite unique to the linux cpu scheduler as far as I can tell. > On any other scheduler or OS a nice 19 "background" task will make your > machine run much slower. > > Cheers, > Con > Thanks. I understood it's a feature of linux kernel and am satisfied with it. Actually on Windows xp my application sometimes slows down maybe due to inpropoer scheduler. -- Luckiest in the world / Weapon of Mass Distraction http://maverick6664.bravehost.com/ Aviation Jokes: http://www.geocities.com/tetsuji_rai/ Background: http://maverick.ns1.name/ - 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/