On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:41:05PM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Tuesday 13 March 2007 20:29, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > So the question is: if all tasks are on the same nice level, how does, > > in Mike's test scenario, RSDL behave relative to the current > > interactivity code? ... > The only way to get the same behaviour on RSDL without hacking an > interactivity estimator, priority boost cpu misproportionator onto it is to > either -nice X or +nice lame.
Hello Ingo, After talking to Con over IRC (and if I can summarize it), he's wondering if properly nicing those tasks, as previously mention in user emails, would solve this potential user reported regression or is something additional needed. It seems like folks are happy with the results once the nice tweeking is done. This is a huge behavior change after all to scheduler (just thinking out loud). bill - 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/
