From: Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: scheduler interactivity - does this patch help?
Date: 09 Jun 2003 21:22:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1055186553.707.1.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <36450000.1055137396@[10.10.2.4]>
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 07:43, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> I've had this patch (I think from Ingo) kicking around in -mjb
> for a while. I'm going to drop it unless someone thinks it's useful
> for some testcase you have ... anyone interested?
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
> diff -urpN -X /home/fletch/.diff.exclude 400-reiserfs_dio/kernel/sched.c 420-sched_interactive/kernel/sched.c
> --- 400-reiserfs_dio/kernel/sched.c Fri May 30 19:26:34 2003
> +++ 420-sched_interactive/kernel/sched.c Fri May 30 19:28:06 2003
> @@ -89,6 +89,8 @@ int node_threshold = 125;
> #define STARVATION_LIMIT (starvation_limit)
> #define NODE_THRESHOLD (node_threshold)
>
> +#define TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY (HZ/20 ?: 1)
> +
> /*
> * If a task is 'interactive' then we reinsert it in the active
> * array after it has expired its current timeslice. (it will not
> @@ -1365,6 +1367,27 @@ void scheduler_tick(int user_ticks, int
> enqueue_task(p, rq->expired);
> } else
> enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * Prevent a too long timeslice allowing a task to monopolize
> + * the CPU. We do this by splitting up the timeslice into
> + * smaller pieces.
> + *
> + * Note: this does not mean the task's timeslices expire or
> + * get lost in any way, they just might be preempted by
> + * another task of equal priority. (one with higher
> + * priority would have preempted this task already.) We
> + * requeue this task to the end of the list on this priority
> + * level, which is in essence a round-robin of tasks with
> + * equal priority.
> + */
> + if (!(p->time_slice % TIMESLICE_GRANULARITY) &&
> + (p->array == rq->active)) {
> + dequeue_task(p, rq->active);
> + set_tsk_need_resched(p);
> + p->prio = effective_prio(p);
> + enqueue_task(p, rq->active);
> + }
> }
> out_unlock:
> spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
>
I'm currently testing it on a modified 2.5.70-mm6 kernel (with HZ set to
1000) and seems to help a little with XMMS's chunky audio playback when
X is reniced to -20.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-09 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-09 5:43 Martin J. Bligh
2003-06-09 19:22 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana [this message]
2003-06-10 9:39 ` Con Kolivas
2003-06-10 11:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-06-10 11:39 ` Con Kolivas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1055186553.707.1.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com \
--to=felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®