Re: ondemand cpufreq ineffective in 2.6.12 ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



07/12/2005 01:11 PM, Ken Moffat wrote/a écrit:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Ken Moffat wrote:


I was going to say that niceness didn't affect what I was doing, but
I've just rerun it [ in 2.6.11.9 ] and I see that tar and bzip2 show up
with a niceness of 10.  I'm starting to feel a bit out of my depth here


OK, Con was right, and I didn't initially make the connection.

 In 2.6.11, untarring a .tar.bz2 causes tar and bzip2 to run with a
niceness of 10, but everything is fine.

 In 2.6.12, ondemand _only_ has an effect for me in this example if I
put on my admin hat and renice the bzip2 process (tried 0, that works) -
renicing the tar process has no effect (obviously, that part doesn't
push the processor).

So, from a user's point of view it's broken.
Well, it's just the default settings of the kernel which has changed. If you want the old behaviour, you can use (with your admin hat):
echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/ignore_nice
IMHO it seems quite fair, if you have a process nice'd to 10 it probably means you are not in a hurry.

Just by couriosity, I wonder how your processes are automatically reniced to 10 ?


Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]
  Powered by Linux