On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:Yeah, the patch was a first attempt at getting better global fairness for unpinned tasks. I expected there'd be latency problems when unpinned and pinned tasks co-exist. The original code for vruntime adjustment in set_task_cpu() helped alleviate this problem, so removing it in my patch would definitely bring the problem back. On the other hand, leaving it there broke global fairness in my fairness benchmark. So we'd need a better compromise. Were the experiments run on a 2-CPU system? When Xorg experiences large wait time, is it on the same CPU that has the two pinned tasks? If this is the case, then the problem could be X somehow advanced faster and got a larger vruntime then the two pinned tasks, so it had to wait for the pinned ones to catch up before it got a chance to be scheduled. tong -
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Andy Whitcroft | clam |
| Ingo Molnar | [patch] paravirt: VDSO page is essential |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Lovich, Vitali | RE: [PATCH] Packet socket: mmapped IO: PACKET_TX_RING |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
