Hi,
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Roman Zippel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > and note that even on the old scheduler, nice-0 was "3200% more
> > > powerful" than nice +19 (with CONFIG_HZ=300),
> >
> > How did you get that value? At any HZ the ratio should be around 1:10
> > (+- rounding error).
>
> you are wrong again. I sent you the numbers earlier today already:
>
> | PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> | 2332 mingo 25 0 1580 248 196 R 95.1 0.0 0:11.84 loop
> | 2335 mingo 39 19 1576 244 196 R 3.1 0.0 0:00.39 loop
>
> 3.1% is 3067% more than 95.1%, and the ratio is 1:30.67. You again deny
> above that this is the case, and there's nothing i can do about your
> denial of facts - that is your own private problem.
Ingo, how am I supposed to react to this? I'm asking a simple question
and I get this? I'm at serious loss how to deal with you. :-(
Above is based on theoritical values, for a 300HZ kernel these two
processes should get 30 and 3 ticks. Should there be any rounding error or
off by one error so that the processes get one tick less than they should
get or one tick is accounted to the wrong process, my theoritical value is
still within the possible error range and doesn't contradict your
practical values.
Playing around with some other nice levels, confirms the theory that
something is a little off, so I'm quite correct at saying that the ratio
_should_ be 1:10.
OTOH you are the one who is wrong about me (again). :-(
bye, Roman
-
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]
