Re: [patch 1/1] cpufreq_conservative/ondemand: invert meaning of 'ignore nice'
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Wed Nov 16 2005 - 13:39:58 EST
> > The use of the 'ignore_nice' sysfs file is confusing to anyone using it.
> > This removes the sysfs file 'ignore_nice' and in its place creates a
> > 'ignore_nice_load' entry which defaults to '1'; meaning nice'd processes
> > are not counted towards the 'business' caclulation.
> And just for the last time I'll argue that the default should be 0. I have yet
> to discuss this with any laptop user who thinks that 1 is the correct default
> for ondemand.
Me. I have graphics appp here (almara), that does user interaction in
separate thread from real workers. Yet you want real workers to run...
And consider notebook on ac power, using ondemand for acoustic management.
64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
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/