At 01:05 PM 1/14/2006 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Saturday 14 January 2006 03:15, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Um... try irman2
> now... pure evilness)
Hrm I've been using staircase which is immune for so long I'd all but
forgotten about this test case. Looking at your code I assume your changes
should help this?
Yes. How much very much depends on how strictly I try to enforce. In my
experimental tree, I have four stages of throttling: 1 threshold to begin
trying to consume the difference between measured slice_avg and sleep_avg
(kidd gloves), 2 to begin treating all new sleep as noninteractive (stern
talking to), 3 to cut off new sleep entirely (you're grounded), and 4 is
when to start using slice_avg instead of the out of balance sleep_avg for
the priority calculation (um, bitch-slap?). Levels 1 and 2 won't stop
irman2, 3 will, and especially 4 will.
These are all /proc settings at the moment, so I can set set my starvation
pain threshold from super duper desktop (all off) to just as fair as a
running slice completion time average can possibly make it (all at 1ns
differential), and anywhere in between.
-Mike
-
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]
