Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:01:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:01:38 -0500 Received: from harpo.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.34]:19656 "EHLO harpo.it.uu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 13:01:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 19:01:15 +0100 (MET) From: Mikael Pettersson Message-Id: <200201071801.TAA11871@harpo.it.uu.se> To: torvalds@transmeta.com Subject: Re: 2.5.2-pre performance degradation on an old 486 Cc: axboe@suse.de, davidel@xmailserver.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mjh@vr-web.de Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 08:43:04 -0800 (PST), Linus Torvalds wrote: >Hey, that would do it. It looks like the idle task ends up being a >_normal_ process (just nice'd down), so it will get real CPU time instead >of only getting scheduled when nothing else is runnable. > >Davide, I think the bounce-buffer is a red herring, it's simply that we're >wasting time in idle.. This does seem to be the case. As a quick hack I added if (p == &init_task) return -50; at the start of kernel/sched.c:goodness() [to approximate the old scheduler's behaviour], and this immediately restored performance on my 486 to the old scheduler's levels. /Mikael - 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/