Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751709AbXECT5J (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 15:57:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751892AbXECT5J (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 15:57:09 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.93.40.71]:47765 "EHLO holomorphy.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751709AbXECT5H (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2007 15:57:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 12:57:38 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Ting Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davidel@xmailserver.org Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v7 Message-ID: <20070503195738.GX31925@holomorphy.com> References: <200704300820.49078.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070503074552.GA14960@elte.hu> <4639F970.5080701@cs.umass.edu> <20070503151741.GC1812@elte.hu> <463A0734.6090408@cs.umass.edu> <20070503194827.GA10423@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070503194827.GA10423@elte.hu> Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1483 Lines: 29 * Ting Yang wrote: >> then how much time is needed for "curr" to build a 2 * 32 difference >> on fair_key, with every 1 ms it updates fair_key by 1/32 ? 2 * 32 * >> 32 ! On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:48:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > yes - but the "*32" impacts the rescheduling granularity, the "/32" > impacts the speed of how the key moves. So the total execution speed of > the nice -10 task is still "*32" of a nice 0 task - it's just that not > only it gets 32 times more CPU time, it also gets it at 32 times larger > chunks at once. But the rescheduling granularity does _not_ impact the > CPU share the task gets, so there's no quadratic effect. > but this is really simple to test: boot up CFS, start two infinite > loops, one at nice 0 and one at nice +10 and look at it via "top" and > type 's 60' in top to get a really long update interval for precise > results. You wont see quadratically less CPU time used up by the nice > +10 task, you'll see it getting the intended 1/32 share of CPU time. Davide has code to test this more rigorously. Looks like I don't need to do very much to get a nice test going at all, besides fiddling with options parsing and maybe a few other things. -- wli - 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/