On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 21:24 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> Sorry, I haven't really been following this thread and now I'm confused.
>
> You're saying that it's somehow the scheduler's fault that X isn't
> running with a high enough priority?
I'm saying that the current scheduler adjusts for interactive loads,
this new one doesn't. I'm seeing interactivity regressions, and they
are not fixed with nice unless nice is used to maximum effect. I'm
saying yes, I can lower my expectations, but no I don't want to.
A four line summary is as short as I can make it.
-Mike
-
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/
