From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>
To: "Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org, "Jeremy Kerr" <jk@ozlabs.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SCHED_IDLE documentation
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 16:19:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfd18e0f0803050719y274d8b48r9dc2dcc0f9179e3c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1204629104.6241.49.camel@lappy>
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 15:06 +0100, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > Ingo,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > >
> > > * Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > * What's the difference between SCHED_IDLE and SCHED_BATCH?
> > > > >
> > > > > SCHED_BATCH can still have nice levels from -20 to +19, it is a
> > > > > modified SCHED_OTHER/SCHED_NORMAL for "throughput oriented"
> > > > > workloads.
> > > >
> > > > So, suppose we have two CPU intensive jobs, one SCHED_OTHER and the
> > > > other SCHED_BATCH. If they have the same nice value, will/should the
> > > > scheduler favour one over the other?
> > >
> > > yes - SCHED_BATCH does not modify the CPU usage proportion for
> > > CPU-intense tasks, it's their nice value that controls the proportion.
> > > What it will influence is wakeup behavior - i.e. wakeup-intense
> > > workloads should schedule less with SCHED_BATCH. (but how that is done
> > > is really fluid and will probably tweaked in the future.)
> > >
> > > Ingo
> >
> > So, I've tweaked the description of SCHED_BATCH in the
> > sched_setscheduler.2 man page, and added some text describing
> > SCHED_IDLE. Relevant excepts below. Does his look okay to you?
> >
> > SCHED_OTHER is the default universal time-sharing sched-
> > uler policy used by most processes. SCHED_BATCH is
> > intended for "batch" style execution of processes.
> > SCHED_IDLE is intended for running very low priority
> > background jobs. SCHED_FIFO and SCHED_RR are intended
> > for special time-critical applications that need precise
> > control over the way in which runnable processes are
> > selected for execution.
> >
> > Processes scheduled with SCHED_OTHER, SCHED_BATCH, or
> > SCHED_IDLE must be assigned the static priority 0. Pro-
> > cesses scheduled under SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR can have a
> > static priority in the range 1 to 99.
> > ...
> >
> > SCHED_BATCH: Scheduling batch processes
> > (Since Linux 2.6.16.) SCHED_BATCH can only be used at
> > static priority 0. This policy is similar to
> > SCHED_OTHER, except that it will cause the scheduler to
> > always assume that the process is CPU-intensive. Conse-
> > quently, the scheduler will apply a small scheduling
> > penalty with respect to wakeup behaviour, so that this
> > process is mildly disfavored in scheduling decisions.
> > This policy is useful for workloads that are non-interac-
> > tive, but do not want to lower their nice value, and for
> > workloads that want a deterministic scheduling policy
> > without interactivity causing extra preemptions (between
> > the workload's tasks).
> >
> > SCHED_IDLE: Scheduling very low priority jobs
> > (Since Linux 2.6.23.) SCHED_IDLE can only be used at
> > static priority 0; the process nice value has no influ-
> > ence for this policy. This policy is intended for run-
> > ning jobs at extremely low priority (lower even than a
> > +19 nice value with the SCHED_OTHER or SCHED_BATCH poli-
> > cies).
>
> Your SCHED_BATCH and SCHED_IDLE descriptions seem at odds, in that your
> SCHED_IDLE description says you can run SCHED_BATCH +19, however your
> SCHED_BATCH description says you can only run at nice 0.
>
> To clarify SCHED_BATCH _can_ indeed use the full nice range.
Peter,
The problem is that the page is slightly confusing in that it talks
about two different types of priorities:
"static priorities" which can only be non-zero (1 to 99) for RR and
FIFO policies.
"dynamic priorities" (aka "nice value") which can be (in userspace) -20 to +19.
I tweaked the wording in the description of SCHED_BATCH a little to
make this clearer.
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Maintainer of the Linux man-pages project
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Want to report a man-pages bug? Look here:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-05 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1203376368.275756.252634247263.1.gpush@pokey>
[not found] ` <200803030612.28039.arnd@arndb.de>
[not found] ` <20080303051719.GA26102@lst.de>
2008-03-03 6:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-03-03 7:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-03 8:40 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 9:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-03 9:31 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-03-03 10:03 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 10:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-03 10:12 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 10:07 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-03 10:20 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 12:31 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-03 12:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-03 14:06 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-04 11:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-05 15:19 ` Michael Kerrisk [this message]
2008-03-03 14:42 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-03-05 15:02 ` Michael Kerrisk
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=cfd18e0f0803050719y274d8b48r9dc2dcc0f9179e3c@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jk@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®