Peter Schultz <pmes_at_bis.midco.net> wrote: > Taku YAMAMOTO wrote: > > Unfortunately, due to over-optimization in sched_switch(), SCHED_ULE doesn't > > give reasonable CPU time to the threads which are using scheduler activation. > > > > Detailed analisis is described in my previous message posted to current_at_: > > "SCHED_ULE sometimes puts P_SA processes into ksq_next unnecessarily" > > <20040213063139.71298ea9.taku_at_cent.saitama-u.ac.jp> > > or > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040213063139.71298ea9.taku > > , which didn't get broader audience :( > > > > Until the problem is fully addressed, I will propose following patch > > to be applied. (the least intrusive one attached in the former message) > > > > This patch improves interactivity under heavy load very much. My system is VERY well-behaved using this change. (It's 2xSMP). -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green_at_FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\Received on Mon Mar 15 2004 - 08:17:50 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:47 UTC