Re: SMP Affinity and nice

Rich Paredes wrote:

Hi Peter.  2.6.5

OK. That version does not take tasks' nice values into account when doing load balancing and just tries to evenly distribute the tasks among the CPUs. The smpnice patches (to be included in the 2.6.18 kernel) change this so that nice is taken into account when load balancing is done and should fix your problem.

Peter
--
Peter Williams                                   [email protected]

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
 -- Ambrose Bierce
-
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/

---

• References:
  • SMP Affinity and nice
    • From: "Rich Paredes" <[email protected]>
  • Re: SMP Affinity and nice
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
  • Re: SMP Affinity and nice
    • From: Peter Williams <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add new spin_lock for i_flags of xfs_inode [try #2]
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Fix x86_64 _spin_lock_irqsave()
• Previous by thread: Re: SMP Affinity and nice
• Next by thread: Re: SMP Affinity and nice
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]