Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Con Kolivas <kernel@...>, Mike Galbraith <efault@...>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, Peter Williams <pwil3058@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, <caglar@...>, Willy Tarreau <w@...>, Mark Lord <lkml@...>, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...>
Hmm, apparently your X uses ioperm() while mine uses iopl(), and i only
turned off the renicing for iopl. (I fixed this in my tree and it will
show up in -v6.)
note that CFS handles negative nice levels differently from other
schedulers, so the disadvantages of agressively reniced X (lost
throughput due to overscheduling, worse interactivity) do _not_ apply to
CFS.
I think the 'fair' setting would be whatever the scheduler writer
recommends: for SD, X probably performs better at around nice 0 (i'll
let Con correct me if his experience is different). On CFS, nice -10 is
perfectly fine too, and you'll have a zippier desktop under higher
loads. (on servers this might be unnecessary/disadvantegous so there
this can be turned off.)
(also, in my tree i've changed the default from -19 to -10 to make it
less scary to people and to leave more levels to the sysadmin, this
change too will show up in -v6.)
Ingo
-
