On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 11:27 +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Index: linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.17-rc2.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -173,10 +173,17 @@
>
> static unsigned int task_timeslice(task_t *p)
> {
> + unsigned int timeslice;
> +
> if (p->static_prio < NICE_TO_PRIO(0))
> - return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);
> + timeslice = SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE*4, p->static_prio);
> else
> - return SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE, p->static_prio);
> + timeslice = SCALE_PRIO(DEF_TIMESLICE, p->static_prio);
> +
> + if (!TASK_INTERACTIVE(p))
> + timeslice = cpu_rc_scale_timeslice(p, timeslice);
> +
> + return timeslice;
> }
Why does timeslice scaling become undesirable if TASK_INTERACTIVE(p)?
With this barrier, you will completely disable scaling for many loads.
Is it possible you meant !rt_task(p)?
(The only place I can see scaling as having a large effect is on gobs of
non-sleeping tasks. Slice width doesn't mean much otherwise.)
-Mike
-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
ckrm-tech mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
