linux-kernel - Re: SCHED_IDLE documentation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 3 Mar 2008 13:52:27 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	cbe-oss-dev@...abs.org, Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SCHED_IDLE documentation


* Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com> wrote:

> > > * What's the difference between SCHED_IDLE and SCHED_BATCH?
> >
> > SCHED_BATCH can still have nice levels from -20 to +19, it is a 
> > modified SCHED_OTHER/SCHED_NORMAL for "throughput oriented" 
> > workloads.
> 
> So, suppose we have two CPU intensive jobs, one SCHED_OTHER and the 
> other SCHED_BATCH.  If they have the same nice value, will/should the 
> scheduler favour one over the other?

yes - SCHED_BATCH does not modify the CPU usage proportion for 
CPU-intense tasks, it's their nice value that controls the proportion. 
What it will influence is wakeup behavior - i.e. wakeup-intense 
workloads should schedule less with SCHED_BATCH. (but how that is done 
is really fluid and will probably tweaked in the future.)

	Ingo
--
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/