On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 09:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> OK, after some brief testing, I think this is a step in the right
> direct, but there is another problem. In the case where the queue isn't
> empty, the stated intent is utterly defeated by the on runqueue bonus.
The overly verbose one liner below could serve as a minimal ~fix.
Prevent the on-runqueue bonus logic from defeating the idle sleep logic.
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
--- linux-2.6.17-rc4-mm1/kernel/sched.c.org 2006-05-18 08:38:13.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.17-rc4-mm1/kernel/sched.c 2006-05-18 14:47:09.000000000 +0200
@@ -917,6 +917,16 @@ static int recalc_task_prio(task_t *p, u
* with one single large enough sleep.
*/
p->sleep_avg = ceiling;
+ /*
+ * Using INTERACTIVE_SLEEP() as a ceiling places a
+ * nice(0) task 1ms sleep away from promotion, and
+ * gives it 700ms to round-robin with no chance of
+ * being demoted. This is more than generous, so
+ * mark this sleep as non-interactive to prevent the
+ * on-runqueue bonus logic from intervening should
+ * this task not receive cpu immediately.
+ */
+ p->sleep_type = SLEEP_NONINTERACTIVE;
} else {
/*
* Tasks waking from uninterruptible sleep are
-
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]
