On Friday 28 April 2006 17:46, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:11 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:56 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > > I'm also pretty sure, that CPU controller based on timeslice tricks
> > > behaves poorly on burstable load patterns as well and with interactive
> > > tasks. So before commiting I propose to perform a good testing on
> > > different load patterns.
> >
> > Yes, it can only react very slowly.
>
> Actually, this might not be that much of a problem. I know I can
> traverse queue heads periodically very cheaply. Traversing both active
> and expired arrays to requeue starving tasks once every 100ms costs max
> 4usecs (3GHz P4) for a typical distribution.
How many tasks? Your function was O(n) so the more tasks the longer that max
value was.
--
-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]
