On Thursday 19 April 2007, Con Kolivas wrote: [and I snipped a good overview]
>So yes go ahead and think up great ideas for other ways of metering out cpu >bandwidth for different purposes, but for X, given the absurd simplicity of >renicing, why keep fighting it? Again I reiterate that most users of SD have >not found the need to renice X anyway except if they stick to old habits of >make -j4 on uniprocessor and the like, and I expect that those on CFS and >Nicksched would also have similar experiences. FWIW folks, I have never touched x's niceness, its running at the default -1 for all of my so-called 'tests', and I have another set to be rebooted to right now. And yes, my kernel makeit script uses -j4 by default, and has used -j8 just for effects, which weren't all that different from what I expected in 'abusing' a UP system that way. The system DID remain usable, not snappy, but usable. Having tried re-nicing X a while back, and having the rest of the system suffer in quite obvious ways for even 1 + or - from its default felt pretty bad from this users perspective. It is my considered opinion (yeah I know, I'm just a leaf in the hurricane of this list) that if X has to be re-niced from the 1 point advantage its had for ages, then something is basicly wrong with the overall scheduling, cpu or i/o, or both in combination. FWIW I'm using cfq for i/o. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Moore's Constant: Everybody sets out to do something, and everybody does something, but no one does what he sets out to do. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/