Re: [SCHED] wrong priority calc - SIMPLE test case

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

 



At 02:52 PM 12/30/2005 +0100, Paolo Ornati wrote:
WAS: [SCHED] Totally WRONG prority calculation with specific test-case
(since 2.6.10-bk12)
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/12/27/114/index.html

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 10:26:58 +1100
Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:

> The issue is that the scheduler interactivity estimator is a state machine and > can be fooled to some degree, and a cpu intensive task that just happens to > sleep a little bit gets significantly better priority than one that is fully
> cpu bound all the time. Reverting that change is not a solution because it
> can still be fooled by the same process sleeping lots for a few seconds or so > at startup and then changing to the cpu mostly-sleeping slightly behaviour.
> This "fluctuating" behaviour is in my opinion worse which is why I removed
> it.

Trying to find a "as simple as possible" test case for this problem
(that I consider a BUG in priority calculation) I've come up with this
very simple program:

------ sched_fooler.c -------------------------------

Ingo seems to have done something in 2.6.15-rc7-rt1 which defeats your little proggy. Taking a quick peek at the rt scheduler changes, nothing poked me in the eye, but by golly, I can't get this kernel to act up, whereas 2.6.14-virgin does.

-Mike (off to stare harder rt patch)
-
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]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux