Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair

[Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>]

Al Boldi wrote:
> Peter Williams wrote:
> > Al Boldi wrote:
> > > Reducing the prio-level granularity may also be helpful;
> > Because of some of the bit operations code makes it a bad idea to have
> > more than 160 priority levels, you're more or less limited to 60
> > priority levels for SCHED_OTHER tasks (as 100 are used for real time)
> > and you need 40 of these to pay some attention to niceness leaving you
> > about 20 priority levels to use for fiddling.  Is that enough?
> >
> > With spa_ebs (now that CPU rate caps have been removed), you have all 60
> > priorities available for fiddling with as niceness is taken care of when
> > calculating each task's entitlement.
> Ok, increasing the number of prio-levels is one thing, but I was more 
> thinking of reducing the effective difference between each prio-level. For 
> example, this would allow max_tpt_bonus=18, while the effective range would 
> be 3, thus reducing granularity.  Would this be easily introduceable?
OK.  Now (I think) I see what you mean.  I think that you could achieve 
this effect by shortening the promotion interval which I think is still 
one of the tunables.  This effectively controls the strength of priority 
levels -- short promotion intervals weaken and long promotion intervals 
strengthen the effect of different priority levels.
Peter
--
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058@bigpond.net.au

"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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/