#if HZ < 200
#define TICK_SCALE(x) ((x) >> 2)
...
#define NICE_TO_TICKS(nice) (TICK_SCALE(20-(nice))+1)
...
/* in the `recalculate' portion of schedule(): ... */
for_each_task(p)
p->counter = (p->counter >> 1) + NICE_TO_TICKS(p->nice);
)
But,
the value of PROC_CHANGE_PENALTY was not changed accordingly, and is
still 15. This means that the result of the following goodness() code:
if (p->processor == this_cpu)
weight += PROC_CHANGE_PENALTY;
is that any task that executed on `this_cpu' (goodness > 15)
will always be more "desirable" then a task that executed on
another cpu (goodness <= 6) which was not the case in 2.2.x .
am I correct ?
and if so, is this what the authors meant, or did they simply forget
to update PROC_CHANGE_PENALTY's value when moving from 2.2 to 2.4 ?
please cc me: dants@cs.huji.ac.il
thanks, dan.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/