Re: [patch] scheduler cache affinity improvement for 2.4 kernels

[Davide Libenzi]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Davide Libenzi wrote:

> Ingo, i'm giving the timer_ticks patch a try in my proposed scheduler coz
> i like the idea of skipping the if inside goodness(), and i can do this
> safely because inside the proposed scheduler i don't have any cross CPU
> goodnesses ( no "if (p->processor != this_cpu) weight -= p->timer_ticks;" ).
> I made a change to it anyway, that is adding a water-mark in the decay
> behavior ( timer.c ).
> When counter is above this watermark ( currently 20 ) the counter decay as
> usual while if counter <= watermark, ticks accumulates in timer_ticks.
> This solution keeps the same good behavior for CPU bound tasks while it
> gives a "human"/current decay to tasks that has got a lot of counter
> accumulation inside the recalc loop ( I/O bound ).

The watermark is 10 ( DEF_COUNTER ) not 20.

- Davide