Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 19:36:39 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: ray-lk@madrabbit.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Interactivity issue in 2.6.25-rc3
Message-ID: <20080229183639.GC8258@elte.hu>
References: <20080228184407.GA7117@localhost.ift.unesp.br> <20080228191824.GA20019@elte.hu> <2c0942db0802281154y3176e847g8b9a4091df5cc8af@mail.gmail.com> <20080228210627.GA4337@localhost.ift.unesp.br> <20080229160408.GG27248@elte.hu> <20080229171442.GA5173@localhost.ift.unesp.br>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20080229171442.GA5173@localhost.ift.unesp.br>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 831
Lines: 21


* Carlos R. Mafra <crmafra2@gmail.com> wrote:

> > and obviously, even if you only 'feel' long delays that's too an 
> > anomaly by definition, no matter what the scripts say about it. It 
> > might even be a scheduler anomaly as well: for example if the 
> > scheduler clock has an anomaly - on which the delay statistics are 
> > based too.
> 
> But if the scripts say all 'se.wait_max' are < 40 msecs than it is not 
> CFS' fault, right? Even if it takes 3 seconds for a typed letter to 
> appear in the terminal?

yeah, in 99.9% of the cases it's not the scheduler's fault.

	Ingo
--
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/