Re: CFS scheduler unfairly prefers pinned tasks

[paul . szabo]

Dear Mike,

> I see a fairness issue ... but one opposite to your complaint.

Why is that opposite? I think it would be fair for the one pert process
to get 100% CPU, the many oink processes can get everything else. That
one oink is lowly 10% (when others are 100%) is of no consequence.

What happens when you un-pin pert: does it get 100%? What if you run two
perts? Have you reproduced my observations?

---

Good to see that you agree on the fairness issue... it MUST be fixed!
CFS might be wrong or wasteful, but never unfair.

Cheers, Paul

Paul Szabo   psz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/
School of Mathematics and Statistics   University of Sydney    Australia
--
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/