Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751333AbVLaNoS (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 08:44:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751334AbVLaNoS (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 08:44:18 -0500 Received: from omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.83.156]:57809 "EHLO omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751333AbVLaNoS (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Dec 2005 08:44:18 -0500 Message-ID: <43B68B2A.7080208@bigpond.net.au> Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 00:44:10 +1100 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paolo Ornati CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Con Kolivas , Ingo Molnar , Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [SCHED] wrong priority calc - SIMPLE test case References: <20051227190918.65c2abac@localhost> <20051227224846.6edcff88@localhost> <200512281027.00252.kernel@kolivas.org> <20051230145221.301faa40@localhost> <43B5E78C.9000509@bigpond.net.au> <20051231113446.3ad19dbc@localhost> <20051231115213.4a2e01ba@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20051231115213.4a2e01ba@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at omta04ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.133.38] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Sat, 31 Dec 2005 13:44:11 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1640 Lines: 44 Paolo Ornati wrote: > On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 11:34:46 +0100 > Paolo Ornati wrote: > > >>>It is a patch against the 2.6.15-rc7 kernel and includes some other >>>scheduling patches from the -mm kernels. >> >>Yes, this fixes both my test-case (transcode & little program), they >>get priority 25 instead of ~16. >> >>But the priority of DD is now ~23 and so it still suffers a bit: > > > I forgot to mention that even the others "interactive" processes > don't get a good priority too. > > Xorg for example, while only moving the cursor around, gets priority > 23/24. And when cpu-eaters are running (at priority 25) it isn't happy > at all, the cursor begins to move in jerks and so on... > OK. This probably means that the parameters that control the mechanism need tweaking. There should be a file /sys/cpusched/attrs/unacceptable_ia_latency which contains the latency (in nanoseconds) that the scheduler considers unacceptable for interactive programs. Try changing that value and see if things improve? Making it smaller should help but if you make it too small all the interactive tasks will end up with the same priority and this could cause them to get in each other's way. Thanks, Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce - 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/