Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ...

From: Peter Osterlund (petero2@telia.com)
Date: Wed Jan 02 2002 - 17:31:04 EST

Next message: Oliver.Neukum@lrz.uni-muenchen.de: "Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: highmem and usb [was "sr: unalignedtransfer" in 2.5.2-pre1]"
Previous message: Lionel Bouton: "Re: system.map"
In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "[PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> writes:

> a still lower ts

This also lowers the effectiveness of nice values. In 2.5.2-pre6, if I
run two cpu hogs at nice values 0 and 19 respectively, the niced task
will get approximately 20% cpu time (on x86 with HZ=100) and this
patch will give even more cpu time to the niced task. Isn't 20% too
much?

-- 
Peter Osterlund - petero2@telia.com
http://w1.894.telia.com/~u89404340
-
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/

Next message: Oliver.Neukum@lrz.uni-muenchen.de: "Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: highmem and usb [was "sr: unalignedtransfer" in 2.5.2-pre1]"
Previous message: Lionel Bouton: "Re: system.map"
In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "[PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: [PATCH] scheduler fixups ..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:18 EST