On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 01:32:53PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > * With CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED disabled, there are severe > > > interactivity hickups with a niced CPU hog and top running. This > > > started with commit 810e95ccd58d91369191aa4ecc9e6d4a10d8d0c8. > > > > The revert at the bottom causes the wakeup granularity to shrink for + > > nice and to grow for - nice. That is, it becomes easier to preempt a + > > nice task, and harder to preempt a - nice task. > > i think it would be OK to do half of this: make it easier to preempt a > +nice task.
Hmm .. I doubt whether that would help Michel's case, as he seems to be running +niced tasks and having problems getting control over his desktop. Something is basically wrong here .. > Michel, do you really need the -nice portion as well? It's > not a problem to super-preempt positively reniced tasks, but it can be > quite annoying if negatively reniced tasks have super-slices. -- Regards, vatsa _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
