Re: dynamic sched timeslices

[Con Kolivas]

Quoting Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>:

> Kurt Garloff <garloff@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Con,
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 07:45:02AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > That's why I think we should offer the tunables.
> > > 
> > > If your workload is so dedicated to just number crunching it isn't hard
> to add 
> > > a zero to maximum timeslice in kernel/sced.c. 
> > 
> > Of course I can compile a custom kernel for myself and tune all sorts of
> > things. But this is not the way most Linux users want to use Linux any
> > more. Actually that's a long time ago.
> > 
> 
> I don't think we should be averse to offering a couple of nice high-level
> scheduler tunables.  But I do think we should have testing results which
> clearly show that they provide some benefit, and we should agree that the
> scheduler cannot provide the same benefit automagically.
> 
> Apologies in advance if we've seen those testing results and I missed it.

Well that reply takes my message out of context. I'm not averse to tunables - if
they do something.

The only evidence Kurt has shown so far is that he can decrease throughput. The
rest is theoretical based on a scheduler that isn't the 2.6 kernel.

Con

-
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/