Con Kolivas wrote:
quoted text
> On Wednesday 14 March 2007 03:03, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Wednesday 14 March 2007 02:31, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > On Monday 12 March 2007 22:26, Al Boldi wrote:
> > > > I think, it should be possible to spread this max expiration latency
> > > > across the rotation, should it not?
> > >
> > > Can you try the attached patch please Al and Mike? It "dithers" the
> > > priority bitmap which tends to fluctuate the latency a lot more but in
> > > a cyclical fashion. This tends to make the max latency bound to a
> > > smaller value and should make it possible to run -nice tasks without
> > > killing the latency of the non niced tasks. Eg you could possibly run
> > > X nice -10 at a guess like we used to in 2.4 days. It's not essential
> > > of course, but is a workaround for Mike's testcase.
> >
> > Oops, one tiny fix. This is a respin of the patch, sorry.
>
> A few other minor things would need to be updated before this patch is in
> a good enough shape to join the rsdl patches. This one will be good for
> testing though.

Applied against v0.30 mainline.  It only works on prio +16 to +19.


Thanks!

--
Al

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/