Hi, On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:Calculating these values at runtime would have been completely insane, the alternative would be a crummy approximation, so using a lookup table is actually a good thing. That's not the problem. BTW could someone please verify the prio_to_wmult table, especially [16] and [21] look a little off, like a digit was cut off. While I'm at this, the 10% scaling there looks a little much (unless there are other changes I haven't looked at yet), the old code used more like 5%. This would mean a prio -20 task would get 98.86% cpu time compared to a prio 0 task, that was previously about the difference between -20 and 19 (and it would have previously gotten only 88.89%), now a prio -20 task would get 99.98% cpu time compared to a prio 19 task. The individual levels are unfortunately not that easily comparable, but at the overall scale the change looks IMHO a little drastic. bye, Roman -
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | [Bug #11207] VolanoMark regression with 2.6.27-rc1 |
| Zhang, Yanmin | AIM7 40% regression with 2.6.26-rc1 |
| Con Kolivas | [PATCH][RSDL-mm 0/7] RSDL cpu scheduler for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 |
git: | |
| Gregory Haskins | [RFC PATCH 03/17] vbus: add connection-client helper infrastructure |
| David Woodhouse | [PATCH 03/30] solos: FPGA and firmware update support. |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
