mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: mtk.manpages@gmail.com, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature [v2]
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:48:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cf0a6f4b-ba96-9ebe-ad29-ba8ccef5741c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ca16c155-22be-df06-4f2d-4337b72381de@gmail.com>

On 11/25/2016 04:04 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On 11/25/2016 02:02 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>        ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
>>>        │FIXME                                                │
>>>        ├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
>>>        │How do the nice value of  a  process  and  the  nice │
>>>        │value of an autogroup interact? Which has priority?  │
>>>        │                                                     │
>>>        │It  *appears*  that the autogroup nice value is used │
>>>        │for CPU distribution between task groups,  and  that │
>>>        │the  process nice value has no effect there.  (I.e., │
>>>        │suppose two  autogroups  each  contain  a  CPU-bound │
>>>        │process,  with  one  process  having nice==0 and the │
>>>        │other having nice==19.  It appears  that  they  each │
>>>        │get  50%  of  the CPU.)  It appears that the process │
>>>        │nice value has effect only with respect to  schedul‐ │
>>>        │ing  relative to other processes in the *same* auto‐ │
>>>        │group.  Is this correct?                             │
>>>        └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
>>
>> Yup, entity nice level affects distribution among peer entities.
> 
> Huh! I only just learned about this via my experiments while
> investigating autogroups. 
> 
> How long have things been like this? Always? (I don't think
> so.) Since the arrival of CFS? Since the arrival of
> autogrouping? (I'm guessing not.) Since some other point?
> (When?)

Okay, things changed sometime after 2.6.31, at least.
(Just tested on an old box.) So, presumably with the arrival
of either CFS or autogrouping? Next comment certainly applies:

> It seems to me that this renders the traditional process
> nice pretty much useless. (I bet I'm not the only one who'd 
> be surprised by the current behavior.)

Cheers,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-25 15:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-22 15:59 RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 10:33 ` [patch] sched/autogroup: Fix 64bit kernel nice adjustment Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 13:47   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 14:12     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 14:20       ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 15:55         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-24  6:24   ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched/autogroup: Fix 64-bit kernel nice level adjustment tip-bot for Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 11:39 ` RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 13:54   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 15:33     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 16:04       ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 17:11         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-24 21:41           ` RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature [v2] Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 12:52             ` Afzal Mohammed
2016-11-25 13:04               ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 13:02             ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-25 15:04               ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 15:48                 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message]
2016-11-25 15:51                 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-25 16:08                   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 16:18                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-25 16:34                       ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 20:54                         ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 21:49                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-29  7:43                             ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-29 11:46                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-29 13:44                                 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 16:04                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-25 16:13                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-25 16:33                   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-25 22:48                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-23 16:05       ` RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-23 17:19         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-11-23 22:12           ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-27 21:13       ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-28  1:46         ` Mike Galbraith
     [not found]           ` <1127218a-dd9b-71a8-845d-3a83969632fc@gmail.com>
2016-11-29  9:10             ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-11-29 13:46               ` Mike Galbraith

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=cf0a6f4b-ba96-9ebe-ad29-ba8ccef5741c@gmail.com \
    --to=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

Powered by JetHome