[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071002133929.GA3100@ff.dom.local>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:39:29 +0200
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
David Schwartz <davids@...master.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Martin Michlmayr <tbm@...ius.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Network slowdown due to CFS
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 11:03:46AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
...
> should suffice. Currently, I wonder if simply charging (with a key
> recalculated) such a task for all the time it could've used isn't one
> of such methods. It seems, it's functionally analogous with going to
> the end of que of tasks with the same priority according to the old
> sched.
Only now I've read I repeat the idea of David Schwartz (and probably
not only him) from a nearby thread, sorry. But, I still try to find
what was wrong with it?
Jarek P.
-
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