Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:59:44 +0000
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Alexander Clouter <alex-kernel@digriz.org.uk>, akpm@osdl.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davej@redhat.com, davej@codemonkey.org.uk,
       blaisorblade@yahoo.it
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] cpufreq_conservative/ondemand: invert meaning of 'ignore nice'
Message-ID: <20051113195943.GD2193@spitz.ucw.cz>
References: <20051110151111.GA16994@inskipp.digriz.org.uk> <200511110248.58751.kernel@kolivas.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200511110248.58751.kernel@kolivas.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1014
Lines: 24

Hi!

> > The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> > This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> > 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
> > are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
> 
> And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet 
> to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default 
> for ondemand.

Me. I have graphics appp here (almara), that does user interaction in 
separate thread from real workers. Yet you want real workers to run...

And consider notebook on ac power, using ondemand for acoustic management.

-- 
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms         

-
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/