[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eca10ece-1942-8da7-d836-b9270bc5f3eb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 14:04:12 +0100
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To: Afzal Mohammed <afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com>
Cc: mtk.manpages@...il.com, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature [v2]
On 11/25/2016 01:52 PM, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:41:29PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> Suppose that there are two autogroups competing for the same
>> CPU. The first group contains ten CPU-bound processes from a
>> kernel build started with make -j10. The other contains a sin‐
>> gle CPU-bound process: a video player. The effect of auto‐
>> grouping is that the two groups will each receive half of the
>> CPU cycles. That is, the video player will receive 50% of the
>> CPU cycles, rather just 9% of the cycles, which would likely
> ^^^^
> than ?
>
> Regards
> afzal
Thanks, Afzal. Fixed!
Cheers,
Michael
>
>> lead to degraded video playback. Or to put things another way:
>> an autogroup that contains a large number of CPU-bound pro‐
>> cesses does not end up overwhelming the CPU at the expense of
>> the other jobs on the system.
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists