Re: scheduler interactivity: timeslice calculation seem wrong

[Con Kolivas]

Quoting Eric St-Laurent <ericstl34@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> i've read that tasks should start at higher dynamic priority with a
> small timeslice (a priority boost for a starting task) then immediatly
> drop to a lower priority if it use all it's timeslice.

There's a scheduler implementation dating pre 1970 that does this and I am led
to believe someone is working on an implementation for perhaps 2.7

> 
> > implemented theory. Changing it up and down by dynamic priority one way and
> 
> > then the other wasn't helpful when I've tried it previously.
> 
> maybe it's because the timeslice calculation is reversed?

In my email I said I tried it both ways.

Con
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/