On Thursday 13 April 2006 17:41, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> This way also allowed me to eliminate the interactive agony of an array
> switch when at 100% cpu. Seems to work well. No more agony, only tiny
> pin pricks.
>
> Anyway, interested readers will find a copy of irman2.c, which is nice
> for testing interactive starvation, attached. The effect is most
> noticeable with something like bonnie, which otherwise has zero chance
> against irman2. Just about anything will do though. Trying to fire up
> Amarok is good for a chuckle. Whatever. (if anyone plays with irman2
> on 2.6.16 or below, call it with -S 1)
Comments.
> +repeat:
> + while ((idx = find_next_bit(bitmap, MAX_PRIO, idx)) < MAX_PRIO) {
...
> + goto repeat;
...
> + if (rq->nr_running > 1)
> + requeue_starving(rq, now);
An O(n) function in scheduler_tick is probably not the way to tackle this.
--
-ck
-
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]
