Re: SCHED_IDLE documentation

[Michael Kerrisk]

Ingo,

One more thought while we're in this thread.  In my recent tests I
notice that the magnitude of the effect of nice values has changed
quite a lot in recent times.  For example, back in 2.6.18, two CPU
intensive processes would get the following shares of the CPU over 100
seconds of run time (here, three different examples of nice value
settings):

A nice	B nice	%A	%B
-20	-10	58.3	41.7
-20	  0	89.2	10.8
-20	+19	99.7	 0.3

In 2.6.25-rc2, we have:

A nice	B nice	%A	%B
-20	-10	 90.5	9.5
-20	  0	 99.0	1.0
-20	+19	100.0	0.0

While I realise that nice values are not intended to guarantee any
particular degree of access to the CPU, these wide variations in the
effect of the nice value are surprising.  (For the 2.6.25-rc2 -20/+19
case, my test shows the low priority process is getting 0.000% of the
CPU -- i.e., < one thousandth of a percent.  In other words it is in
effect being totally starved of the CPU.)  Any comments?

Cheers,

Michael
--
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/