Re: [ckrm-tech] Re: [PATCH 0/9] CPU controller

[Con Kolivas]

On Friday 28 April 2006 23:55, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote:
> I think you can introduce some threshold to estimate whether
> a process should be treated as an interactive process or not
> while vanilla kernel defines it statically.

The static definition (TASK_INTERACTIVE) used is based on what the cpu 
scheduler already knows about the tasks so although it's static, it is based 
on the dynamic behaviour and most recent sleep/run data. Unfortunately we 
can't define it any clearer than that. We have no better metric that states 
clearly that anything is definitely interactive. Thus there is no clearly 
defined threshold we can use either. If it was that simple the estimator 
would be simpler and we wouldn't have half a dozen alternative cpu schedulers 
available all looking to tackle much the same thing.

-- 
-ck
-
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/