Re: [PATCH] optional non-interactive mode for cpu scheduler

[Kyle Moffett]

On Nov 02, 2004, at 08:52, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> One exception would be CPU-bound code with multiple threads which
> interact with each other - one always runs but the others always sleep.
> A possible solution would be to exclude all inter-task synchronization
> methods from the 'interactivity boost' and only hard-device-waits would
> be considered true 'waiting', such as keyboard, mouse, disk or network
> IO.

Alternatively, you might try a system where each "hard-device-wait"
gets a specific interactivity rating, the default would be 1.0, but one
could specify that /dev/input/mice gets a rating of 10.0.  Then when
handling inter-process communication, a wait on IPC connected to
some local program would cause a change in interactivity rating
based on the current interactivity of the other process. EX:

gpm waits on /dev/input/mice, gets a high interactivity rating.
X waits on /dev/gpmdata, gets a lesser but still significant rating.

This clearly has some flaws, but it may be useful in some scenarios.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a17 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$
L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+
PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ r  
!y?(-)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/