On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:28:36 +0100 Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 07/10/2019 21:41, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > The differences are probably due to the different precision
> > of the computations: I don't know the precision of those originally
> > carried out by Ingo Molnar (single precision? double
On 07/10/2019 21:41, Francesco Poli wrote:
> The differences are probably due to the different precision
> of the computations: I don't know the precision of those originally
> carried out by Ingo Molnar (single precision? double?), but calc(1)
> is an arbitrary precision calculator and, by default
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 10:13:23 +0100 Valentin Schneider wrote:
[...]
> Following the blame rabbit hole I found this:
>
> 254753dc321e ("sched: make the multiplication table more accurate")
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=254753dc321ea2b753ca9bc58ac3295
Hi Francesco,
On 06/10/2019 23:32, Francesco Poli wrote:
[...]
> I searched the web and the mailing list archives, but I failed to find
> an answer to this question. Could someone please explain me how those
> numbers were picked?
>
Following the blame rabbit hole I found this:
254753dc321e ("s
Hello,
I am trying to understand something about the internals of the
completely fair scheduler (CFS) used in the Linux kernel.
I have a question about the mapping between nice levels and weights,
I hope someone can shed some light on those numbers.
Please note that I am not subscribed to the LKML
5 matches
Mail list logo
