[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070415235421.GF2986@holomorphy.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:54:21 -0700
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
* William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com> wrote:
>> I've been suggesting testing CPU bandwidth allocation as influenced by
>> nice numbers for a while now for a reason.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 09:57:48PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Oh I was very much testing "CPU bandwidth allocation as influenced by
> nice numbers" - it's one of the basic things i do when modifying the
> scheduler. An automated tool, while nice (all automation is nice)
> wouldnt necessarily show such bugs though, because here too it needed
> thousands of running tasks to trigger in practice. Any volunteers? ;)
Worse comes to worse I might actually get around to doing it myself.
Any more detailed descriptions of the test for a rainy day?
-- wli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists