Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 18:53:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 18:50:47 -0500 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([208.129.208.51]:52493 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 18:50:30 -0500 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:56:29 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com To: Ed Tomlinson cc: Ingo Molnar , lkml , Dave Jones Subject: Re: [patch] O(1) scheduler-H6/H7/I0 and nice +19 In-Reply-To: <20020115234814.DB1E729905@oscar.casa.dyndns.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > The 2.4.17-I0 patch makes things much better here. Does this one > suffer from the same bugs that the 2.5.2 version has? > > PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND > 790 ed 44 19 14320 13M 640 R N 69.4 2.7 166:18 setiathome > 7676 ed 0 0 14908 14M 11036 R 16.7 2.8 0:13 kmail > 5703 root 0 -10 82596 23M 1808 R < 11.2 4.6 2:23 XFree86 > 7725 ed 0 0 1016 1016 776 R 1.3 0.1 0:00 top > 5803 ed 0 0 3764 3764 2904 R 0.5 0.7 0:15 gkrellm > 7720 ed 0 0 9752 9752 7856 R 0.3 1.8 0:04 kdeinit > 5725 ed 0 0 7524 7520 6888 S 0.1 1.4 0:01 kdeinit > 1 root 0 0 520 472 452 S 0.0 0.0 0:07 init > 2 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 keventd > 3 root 17 19 0 0 0 SWN 0.0 0.0 0:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0 > 4 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 kswapd > 5 root 25 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 bdflush > 6 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:02 kupdated > 7 root 12 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 khubd > 18 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 kreiserfsd > 60 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 mdrecoveryd > 219 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 usb-storage-0 > 220 root 0 0 0 0 0 SW 0.0 0.0 0:00 scsi_eh_0 > 234 root 0 0 648 644 528 S 0.0 0.1 0:00 syslogd > 238 root -2 0 1344 1344 1264 S 0.0 0.2 0:00 watchdog > 243 root 0 0 1184 1176 456 S 0.0 0.2 0:00 klogd > 249 daemon 0 0 472 460 380 S 0.0 0.0 0:00 portmap > > Major difference from older version of the patch is that top shows many > processes with PRI 0. I am not sure this is intended? > > Thanks > Ed Tomlinson > > On January 14, 2002 10:27 pm, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > > On January 14, 2002 09:33 pm, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > try to replace : > > > > > > > > PRIO_TO_TIMESLICE() and RT_PRIO_TO_TIMESLICE() with : > > > > > > > > #define NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(n) (MIN_TIMESLICE + ((MAX_TIMESLICE - \ > > > > MIN_TIMESLICE) * ((n) + 20)) / 39) > > > > > > > > > > > > NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(p->__nice) > > > > > > Not sure about this change. gkrellm shows the compile getting about 40% > > > cpu. Best result here seems to be with a larger range of timeslices. ie > > > 1-15 ((10*HZ)/1000...) instead lets the compile get 80% of the cpu. > > > wonder if this might be the way to go? The above macro is wrong, this is right : #define NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(n) (MIN_TIMESLICE + ((MAX_TIMESLICE - \ MIN_TIMESLICE) * (19 - (n))) / 39) - Davide - 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/