ppc32: Weird process scheduling behaviour with 2.6.24-rc

Srivatsa Vaddagiri vatsa at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Jan 29 00:11:35 EST 2008

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 01:32:53PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra at chello.nl> wrote:
> > >       * With CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED disabled, there are severe
> > >         interactivity hickups with a niced CPU hog and top running. This
> > >         started with commit 810e95ccd58d91369191aa4ecc9e6d4a10d8d0c8. 
> > 
> > The revert at the bottom causes the wakeup granularity to shrink for + 
> > nice and to grow for - nice. That is, it becomes easier to preempt a + 
> > nice task, and harder to preempt a - nice task.
> i think it would be OK to do half of this: make it easier to preempt a 
> +nice task.

Hmm .. I doubt whether that would help Michel's case, as he seems to be running
+niced tasks and having problems getting control over his desktop.

Something is basically wrong here ..

> Michel, do you really need the -nice portion as well? It's 
> not a problem to super-preempt positively reniced tasks, but it can be 
> quite annoying if negatively reniced tasks have super-slices.


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list