Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > yield() really sucks if there are a lot of runnable tasks. And the amount
> > of CPU which that thread uses isn't likely to matter anyway.
> >
> > I think it'd be better to just not do this. Perhaps alter the thread's
> > static priority instead? Does the scheduler have a knob which can be used
> > to disable a tasks's dynamic priority boost heuristic?
>
> We do have SCHED_BATCH but even that doesn't really have the desired effect.
> I know how much yield sucks and I actually want it to suck as much as yield
> does.
Why do you want that?
If prefetch is doing its job then it will save the machine from a pile of
major faults in the near future. The fact that the machine happens to be
running a number of busy tasks doesn't alter that. It's _worth_ stealing a
few cycles from those tasks now to avoid lengthy D-state sleeps in the near
future?
-
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]
