At 04:39 AM 3/13/2003 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>At 12:22 PM 3/13/2003 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
>>On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:30, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> > At 10:19 PM 3/12/2003 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> > >On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:37, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> > > > >Is this in addition to your previous errr hack or instead of?
>> > > >
>> > > > Instead of. The buttugly patch destroyed interactivity. This one
>> > > > cures starvation, and interactivity is really nice.
>> > >
>> > >Ok that fixes the "getting stuck in process load" but it still hangs on
>> > >contest. I'll just have to give mm5 a go and see if whatever problem that
>> > > was went away in the mean time.
>> >
>> > (%$&#!!)
>>
>>No need to curse. Turns out this is an unrelated bug with the anticipatory
>>scheduler which akpm is onto. Your fix worked fine for the scheduler based
>>hang.
>
>Nope (drat), not quite. I fixed the parse Mem: booboo, and see occasional
>hangs doing complete irman test runs. The process load works fine, but
>the other two loads will hang once in a while.
Well shoot, that was easy to "fix". If you want to give it a try, set the
#if 0 to #if 1. Instead of _moving_ the decay to prevent high switch rate
tasks from getting too much boost, you need to add it instead. This may
not be the right fix, but it works for me. X still retains it's boost just
fine.
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 15 2003 - 22:00:33 EST