Op Tuesday 06 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
In a way, I think they are right. Let me explain. Pluggable schedulers are
useful when you want to switch away from the default one. This is very
useful during development of a new scheduler, as well as when you're not
satisfied with the default
On Wednesday 07 March 2007 04:50, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Gene Heskett wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
As Con pointed out, for some workloads and
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:18:44AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
jos poortvliet wrote:
Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
compared to mainline, but it won't make it in (or at
Hi Bill,
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 04:37:37PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
(...)
The point is that no one CPU scheduler will satisfy the policy needs of
all users, any more than one i/o scheduler does so. We have realtime
scheduling, preempt both voluntary and involuntary, why should we not
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 05:41 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:18:44AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > > jos poortvliet wrote:
> > > > Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
> > > > compared
On Monday 05 March 2007 10:13, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Con,
>
> I've now given it a try with HZ=250 on my dual-athlon. It works
> beautifully. I also quickly checked that playing mp3 doesn't skip during
> make -j4, and that gears runs fairly smoothly, since those are the
> references people often
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:18:44AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > jos poortvliet wrote:
> > > Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
> > > compared to mainline, but it won't make it in (or at least, it's not
> > >
On Monday 05 March 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
>> The patch _does_ make a difference. For instance reading mail with
>> freenet working hard (threaded java application) and gentoo's emerge
>> triggering compiles to update the box is much smoother.
>>
>>
Hi,
I have had this in for about 24 hours. So far so good. I am running on IUP
amd64 with
'voluntary kernel Preemption' enabled (preemptible kernels seem to lock up solid
switching between 32 and 64 apps - no opps and nothing on the serial console...)
The patch _does_ make a difference. For
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
>
> The patch _does_ make a difference. For instance reading mail with freenet
> working
> hard (threaded java application) and gentoo's emerge triggering compiles to
> update the
> box is much smoother.
>
> Think this scheduler needs serious
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> jos poortvliet wrote:
> > Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
> > compared to mainline, but it won't make it in (or at least, it's not
> > likely). So we can hope this WILL make it into mainline, but I wouldn't
On Monday 05 March 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:19:25 -0500
>
>Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Andrew, please, get this one in ASAP,
>
>I'm presently nearly 1000 messages behind on my lkml reading. We'll get
>there.
>
>> but promise me an -mm won't trash
>> half
jos poortvliet wrote:
Op Sunday 04 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
Hi Con !
This was designed to be robust for any application since linux demands a
general purpose scheduler design, while preserving interactivity, instead
of optimising for one particular end use.
Well, I haven't tested it
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:19:25 -0500
Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew, please, get this one in ASAP,
I'm presently nearly 1000 messages behind on my lkml reading. We'll get
there.
> but promise me an -mm won't trash
> half my filesystems like one I tried 2-3 years ago did.
I
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 05:23, Al Boldi wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> > Gears just isn't an interactive task and just about anything but gears
> > would be a better test case since its behaviour varies wildly under
> > different combinations of graphics cards, memory bandwidth, cpu and so
> > on.
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
> This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
> A full rollup of the patch for 2.6.20:
> http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/sched-rsdl-0.26.patch
This patch has
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 05:29, Simon Arlott wrote:
> On 04/03/07 22:27, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
> >> If I run glxgears, thunderbird/firefox become really slow to
> >> respond/display and cpu usage isn't even at 100%. I had thunderbird
> >> lagging
On Monday 05 March 2007, Lee Revell wrote:
>On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> >This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
>>
>> This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
>
>You can probably
On Monday 05 March 2007, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
>On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> >This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
>>
>> This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
>
>On 3/5/07, Gene
On 04/03/07 22:27, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
If I run glxgears, thunderbird/firefox become really slow to
respond/display and cpu usage isn't even at 100%. I had thunderbird lagging
on keyboard character repeat earlier but can't reproduce that now
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
You can probably speed things up by regression testing against a wide
range
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 05 March
On Monday 05 March 2007 22:59, Al Boldi wrote:
> Markus Törnqvist wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:34:45AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> > >Ok, gears is smooth when you run "make -j4", but with "nice make -j4",
> > > gears becomes bursty. This looks like a problem with nice-levels. In
> > >
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:34:45AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> >Ok, gears is smooth when you run "make -j4", but with "nice make -j4",
> > gears becomes bursty. This looks like a problem with nice-levels. In
> > general, looking subjectively at top d.1, procs appear to
Le Lun 5 mars 2007 10:53, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>>This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
>
> This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
One can dream...
I suspect Linus will disagree, especially if it never
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
--
Nicolas Mailhot
-
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
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
--
Nicolas Mailhot
-
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
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
--
Cheers, Gene
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
Le Lun 5 mars 2007 10:53, Gene Heskett a écrit :
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
One can dream...
I suspect Linus will disagree, especially if it never was in
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:34:45AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
Ok, gears is smooth when you run make -j4, but with nice make -j4,
gears becomes bursty. This looks like a problem with nice-levels. In
general, looking subjectively at top d.1, procs appear to show jerkiness
On Monday 05 March 2007 22:59, Al Boldi wrote:
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:34:45AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
Ok, gears is smooth when you run make -j4, but with nice make -j4,
gears becomes bursty. This looks like a problem with nice-levels. In
general, looking
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007,
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
You can probably speed things up by regression testing against a wide
range of
On 04/03/07 22:27, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
If I run glxgears, thunderbird/firefox become really slow to
respond/display and cpu usage isn't even at 100%. I had thunderbird lagging
on keyboard character repeat earlier but can't reproduce that now
On Monday 05 March 2007, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett
On Monday 05 March 2007, Lee Revell wrote:
On 3/5/07, Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
This looks like -mm stuff if you want it in 2.6.22
This needs to get to 2.6.21, it really is that big an improvement.
You can probably speed things up by
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 05:29, Simon Arlott wrote:
On 04/03/07 22:27, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
If I run glxgears, thunderbird/firefox become really slow to
respond/display and cpu usage isn't even at 100%. I had thunderbird
lagging on keyboard
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
A full rollup of the patch for 2.6.20:
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/sched-rsdl-0.26.patch
This patch has been
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 05:23, Al Boldi wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
Gears just isn't an interactive task and just about anything but gears
would be a better test case since its behaviour varies wildly under
different combinations of graphics cards, memory bandwidth, cpu and so
on.
What
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:19:25 -0500
Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew, please, get this one in ASAP,
I'm presently nearly 1000 messages behind on my lkml reading. We'll get
there.
but promise me an -mm won't trash
half my filesystems like one I tried 2-3 years ago did.
I can't.
jos poortvliet wrote:
Op Sunday 04 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
Hi Con !
This was designed to be robust for any application since linux demands a
general purpose scheduler design, while preserving interactivity, instead
of optimising for one particular end use.
Well, I haven't tested it
On Monday 05 March 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:19:25 -0500
Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew, please, get this one in ASAP,
I'm presently nearly 1000 messages behind on my lkml reading. We'll get
there.
but promise me an -mm won't trash
half my filesystems
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
jos poortvliet wrote:
Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
compared to mainline, but it won't make it in (or at least, it's not
likely). So we can hope this WILL make it into mainline, but I wouldn't
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
The patch _does_ make a difference. For instance reading mail with freenet
working
hard (threaded java application) and gentoo's emerge triggering compiles to
update the
box is much smoother.
Think this scheduler needs serious looking at.
Hi,
I have had this in for about 24 hours. So far so good. I am running on IUP
amd64 with
'voluntary kernel Preemption' enabled (preemptible kernels seem to lock up solid
switching between 32 and 64 apps - no opps and nothing on the serial console...)
The patch _does_ make a difference. For
On Monday 05 March 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
The patch _does_ make a difference. For instance reading mail with
freenet working hard (threaded java application) and gentoo's emerge
triggering compiles to update the box is much smoother.
Think this
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:18:44AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
jos poortvliet wrote:
Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
compared to mainline, but it won't make it in (or at least, it's not
likely). So
On Monday 05 March 2007 10:13, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Con,
I've now given it a try with HZ=250 on my dual-athlon. It works
beautifully. I also quickly checked that playing mp3 doesn't skip during
make -j4, and that gears runs fairly smoothly, since those are the
references people often use.
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 05:41 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 11:18:44AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 10:05, Bill Davidsen wrote:
jos poortvliet wrote:
Well, imho his current staircase scheduler already does a better job
compared to mainline,
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
>On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >There will be times when the mainline scheduler feels more
>> > interactive than this scheduler, and that is because it has
>> > significant unfairness granted towards interactive tasks. This
>> > degree
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >There will be times when the mainline scheduler feels more interactive
> > than this scheduler, and that is because it has significant unfairness
> > granted towards interactive tasks. This degree of unfairness in an
> > effort to maintain interactivity
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
>(...)
>
>> > That's just what it did, but when you "nice make -j4", things
>> > (gears) start to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
>>
>> gears isn't an interactive task. Apart from
On Monday 05 March 2007 10:13, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> I've now given it a try with HZ=250 on my dual-athlon.
Great, thanks. The HZ should make very little difference, except for slightly
lower latencies as you increase the HZ.
> It works
> beautifully. I also quickly checked that playing mp3
Op Monday 05 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> (...)
>
> > > That's just what it did, but when you "nice make -j4", things (gears)
> > > start to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
> >
> > gears isn't an interactive task. Apart
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
(...)
> > That's just what it did, but when you "nice make -j4", things (gears) start
> > to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
>
> gears isn't an interactive task. Apart from using it as a background load to
> check for
On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
> On 04/03/07 21:49, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Monday 05 March 2007 07:35, Al Boldi wrote:
> >> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >>> This means that if you heavily load up your machine without the use of
> >>> 'nice' then your interactive tasks _will_ slow
On Monday 05 March 2007 07:35, Al Boldi wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > >> >> >This message is to announce the first general public release of
> > > >> >> > the "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
>
> Thanks a lot!
You're welcome.
>
> > Just to make it clear. The purpose of this
Con Kolivas wrote:
> > >> >> >This message is to announce the first general public release of
> > >> >> > the "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
Thanks a lot!
> Just to make it clear. The purpose of this scheduler is at all costs to
> maintain absolute fairness no matter what type of
Op Sunday 04 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
> Hi Con !
> > This was designed to be robust for any application since linux demands a
> > general purpose scheduler design, while preserving interactivity, instead
> > of optimising for one particular end use.
>
> Well, I haven't tested it yet, but
Hi Con !
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 12:49:49AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > >On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > >> >On Sunday
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:45, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> > "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
> >
> > Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out
On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >> >This message is to announce the first
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >> >This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> >> > "Rotating
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >This message is to announce the first general public release of the
>> > "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
>>
>> I assume to test this, we
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> > "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
>
> I assume to test this, we select the deadline scheduler?
No, only the
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
>This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
I assume to test this, we select the deadline scheduler?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap,
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
I assume to test this, we select the deadline scheduler?
--
Cheers, Gene
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap,
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
I assume to test this, we select the deadline scheduler?
No, only the deadline in the
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
I assume to test this, we select the
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public
On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:45, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out to
design,
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 22:08, Gene Heskett wrote:
On
Hi Con !
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 12:49:49AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 00:25, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007 23:24, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 March 2007
Op Sunday 04 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
Hi Con !
This was designed to be robust for any application since linux demands a
general purpose scheduler design, while preserving interactivity, instead
of optimising for one particular end use.
Well, I haven't tested it yet, but your
Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of
the Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
Thanks a lot!
Just to make it clear. The purpose of this scheduler is at all costs to
maintain absolute fairness no matter what type of load it is put
On Monday 05 March 2007 07:35, Al Boldi wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of
the Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
Thanks a lot!
You're welcome.
Just to make it clear. The purpose of this scheduler is at all costs to
On Monday 05 March 2007 09:19, Simon Arlott wrote:
On 04/03/07 21:49, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 05 March 2007 07:35, Al Boldi wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
This means that if you heavily load up your machine without the use of
'nice' then your interactive tasks _will_ slow down
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
(...)
That's just what it did, but when you nice make -j4, things (gears) start
to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
gears isn't an interactive task. Apart from using it as a background load to
check for starvation because
Op Monday 05 March 2007, schreef Willy Tarreau:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
(...)
That's just what it did, but when you nice make -j4, things (gears)
start to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
gears isn't an interactive task. Apart from using it
On Monday 05 March 2007 10:13, Willy Tarreau wrote:
I've now given it a try with HZ=250 on my dual-athlon.
Great, thanks. The HZ should make very little difference, except for slightly
lower latencies as you increase the HZ.
It works
beautifully. I also quickly checked that playing mp3
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:49:29AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
(...)
That's just what it did, but when you nice make -j4, things
(gears) start to stutter. Is that due to the staircase?
gears isn't an interactive task. Apart from using it as a
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
There will be times when the mainline scheduler feels more interactive
than this scheduler, and that is because it has significant unfairness
granted towards interactive tasks. This degree of unfairness in an
effort to maintain interactivity has been
On Sunday 04 March 2007, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
There will be times when the mainline scheduler feels more
interactive than this scheduler, and that is because it has
significant unfairness granted towards interactive tasks. This
degree of unfairness
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
> This message is to announce the first general public release of the
> "Rotating Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
>
> Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out to
> design, from scratch, a new scheduling policy design
This message is to announce the first general public release of the "Rotating
Staircase DeadLine" cpu scheduler.
Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out to design,
from scratch, a new scheduling policy design which satisfies every
requirement for SCHED_NORMAL
This message is to announce the first general public release of the Rotating
Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out to design,
from scratch, a new scheduling policy design which satisfies every
requirement for SCHED_NORMAL
On Sunday 04 March 2007 18:00, Con Kolivas wrote:
This message is to announce the first general public release of the
Rotating Staircase DeadLine cpu scheduler.
Based on previous work from the staircase cpu scheduler I set out to
design, from scratch, a new scheduling policy design which
101 - 192 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
