Re: 2.1.126 SMP scheduling

Rik van Riel (H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl)
Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:56:04 +0100 (MET)

On 28 Oct 1998, Andi Kleen wrote:
> In article <36360441.BCC187F2@ecn.purdue.edu>,
> Noah Beck <noah@ecn.purdue.edu> writes:
> > If, for example, I run four parallel loops as below, the interactive
> > remote performance of the system is something like, if I hold down
> > the <return> key so tcsh prints out a bunch of prompts, I only get
> > about one or two prompts printed per second on average. If one were
> > to move the mouse on the X console during this time, it would be
> > extremely jumpy. Attempting to interactively edit files is an exercise
> > in cursor prediction, as well.
>
> I see similar symptoms on both SMP and UP. If I nice the cpu hogs it
> gets better, but per default the scheduler is very nasty to
> interactice processes. This seems to be a regression compared to 2.0.

Maybe my scheduling patch can help with this. One of the
things the scheduling bigpatch does is heavily favour
interactive processes and at the same time slightly lower
scheduling overhead.

If my patch helps, we could integrate part of it in the
kernel. The entire patch consists of very trivial things
and is certified to work stably...

You can get the patch from my home page.

succes,

Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

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