On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 09:46:27 +0100
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:

quoted text
> On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:44 -0800, David Lang wrote:
> 
> > why isn't niceing X to -10 an acceptable option?
> 
> Xorg's priority is only part of the problem.  Every client that needs
> a substantial quantity of cpu while a hog is running will also need
> to be negative nice, no?

I don't suppose you can be a bit more specific, and define how much CPU
constitutes a "substantial quantity"?  It looks to me like X already got
about half of a CPU.

quoted text
>  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  P COMMAND
> 6599 root      26   0  174m  30m 8028 R   51  3.1   7:08.70 0 Xorg


I'm hoping that actually quantifying this issue will result in a better
understanding of the issue...

Thanks,

Mark
-
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/