On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 21:24 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:

quoted text
> Sorry, I haven't really been following this thread and now I'm confused.
> 
> You're saying that it's somehow the scheduler's fault that X isn't
> running with a high enough priority?

I'm saying that the current scheduler adjusts for interactive loads,
this new one doesn't.  I'm seeing interactivity regressions, and they
are not fixed with nice unless nice is used to maximum effect.  I'm
saying yes, I can lower my expectations, but no I don't want to.

A four line summary is as short as I can make it.

	-Mike

-
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/