From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266665AbUGQIqa (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jul 2004 04:46:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266667AbUGQIqa (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jul 2004 04:46:30 -0400 Received: from 153.Red-213-4-13.pooles.rima-tde.net ([213.4.13.153]:23044 "EHLO kerberos.felipe-alfaro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266665AbUGQIq2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Jul 2004 04:46:28 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.8-rc1-np1 From: Felipe Alfaro Solana To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <40F8B7C5.9030201@yahoo.com.au> References: <40F8B7C5.9030201@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 10:45:43 +0200 Message-Id: <1090053943.1828.4.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 1.5.90 (1.5.90-5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 15:23 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Scheduler behaviour is generally pretty good now so I've increased the > timeslice size to see how far I can push it. Some workloads really demand > small timeslices though, so I've added /proc/sys/kernel/base_timeslice. > If you have any problems with the default, please report it to me, and > check if lowering this value helps. On my 700Mhz Pentium III Mobile laptop, I feel that 256ms is too high for the system to keep interactive when a CPU hog is running. For example, running "while true; do a=2; done" makes the system pretty sluggish with the default timeslice. This is noticeable while dragging windows around (the movement is jerky and doesn't feel smooth). Decreasing the timeslie to 50ms, or even better, 25ms, makes the system behave much much better, although it will decrease throughput considerably, I guess. For light to low worloads, the default of 256ms seems acceptable, though. PS: I will test -np1 on my 2Ghz PIV machine very soon.