From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759171AbXGCJMJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 05:12:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755991AbXGCJL6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 05:11:58 -0400 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.183]:60491 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753613AbXGCJL5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 05:11:57 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=rymJvAoKf60T2b91m0Wg5lHwltjsOGMYZvS3eVcqxBWFwZQQP6FtdEhZIpETYo4dWumPnkuBKp3kBdcU/IypdSuJJnle+GELZeBu8cHoy6yOyBgOQD84NSObncDVGGcVRDJsVzRMCbo8Zt4ZILmrMWtrmPxUdqRaCcFA4Yo/Bp4= Message-ID: <19f34abd0707030211r10f7ba04l6b749be5db4b7302@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 11:11:56 +0200 From: "Vegard Nossum" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v18 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20070703071512.GA29984@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070622220202.GA16872@elte.hu> <19f34abd0707020444r47221944tf7f33b2a0d17c367@mail.gmail.com> <20070703071512.GA29984@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/3/07, Ingo Molnar wrote: > does it still get more CPU time than you'd expect it to get? A reniced > or SCHED_IDLE task will 'fill in' any idle time that it senses, so in > itself it's not an anomaly if a task gets 50% and FEH fills in the > remaining 50%. Does it still get CPU time if you start two CPU hogs: > > for (( N=0; N < 2; N++ )); do ( while :; do :; done ) & done > > ? If yes, that would be an anomaly. No, with this test, it gets the expected amount of CPU. Thanks for clearing it up! Vegard