[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1211877312.5760.30.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 10:35:12 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith@...gsmith.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] Re: PostgreSQL pgbench performance regression in
2.6.23+
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 10:20 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Hm, pbench's extreme dislike of preemption, and the starvation testcase
> I sent earlier having an absolute requirement of preemption kinda argues
> that some knobs and dials should be per task or task group (or, or... or
> scheduler should be all knowing all seeing;)
(to somewhat solidify the random thought i'm sharing...)
Perhaps a SCHED_PREEMPT class so such things can co-exist:
SCHED_BATCH == I never preempt.
SCHED_NORMAL == I preempt sometimes.
SCHED_PREEMPT == I always preempt my waker.
(end of random synaptic firing;)
-Mike
--
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