From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261861AbUKBNE3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:04:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262841AbUKBM7J (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:59:09 -0500 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:21156 "EHLO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262964AbUKBM5f (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:57:35 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 13:58:34 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Con Kolivas Cc: linux , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] add requeue task Message-ID: <20041102125834.GI15290@elte.hu> References: <418707E5.90705@kolivas.org> <20041102124252.GE15290@elte.hu> <41878318.8020801@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41878318.8020801@kolivas.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Con Kolivas wrote: > >| Change the granularity code to requeue tasks at their best priority > >| instead of changing priority while they're running. This keeps tasks > >| at their top interactive level during their whole timeslice. > > > >this is a behavioral change and should go into the 'possible negative > >effect on interactivity' bucket. (of course it could very likely have a > >positive effect as well - the bucket is just to separate the risks.) > > Actually I'd like to say I did it for positive effect to counter the > change that occurred with dropping interactive credit. That was what I > found in my testing, and I'd like them both to go together into -mm. just in case my splitout comment wasnt clear: ack for that fix too, conditional on good -mm exposure. Unlike the interactive_credit change i think this one would be borderline doable for 2.6.10 if in -mm for a couple of weeks at least, because the regression fixed by this is fresh in 2.6.9. Ingo