Re: [3/11] issue 3: No understanding of potential cpu capacity

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 04:39:54PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> Responsiveness is still very important. It is quite hard to control. CFS
> doesn't consider latency. The only way to get the best responsiveness is
> to go for best performance which comes at a high cost in energy.

The big problem is that the normal unix task model doesn't cover his at
all -- nice isn't much of a knob.

There's ways in which you can adapt CFS to include such a measure
(search for the EEVDF patches), but I was kinda hoping that tasks that
really desire responsiveness could be made to use SCHED_DEADLINE or
such.


--
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/