From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 2 03:58:34 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B6037B401 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 03:58:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from axl.seasidesoftware.co.za (axl.seasidesoftware.co.za [196.31.7.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A9943FBD for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 03:58:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sheldonh@starjuice.net) Received: from sheldonh by axl.seasidesoftware.co.za with local (Exim 4.12) id 190gsj-0007oK-00; Wed, 02 Apr 2003 13:58:17 +0200 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 13:58:17 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Bruce Evans Message-ID: <20030402115816.GN725@starjuice.net> Mail-Followup-To: Bruce Evans , Jeff Roberson , current@freebsd.org References: <20030402015226.E64602-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> <20030402091300.GG725@starjuice.net> <20030402212503.N26453@gamplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030402212503.N26453@gamplex.bde.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: Sheldon Hearn cc: Jeff Roberson cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE nice behavior fixed. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:58:34 -0000 On (2003/04/02 21:48), Bruce Evans wrote: > > Some of us have been waiting for that behaviour for a long time (long > > before you started working on ULE). > > Er, this is the normal behaviour in FreeBSD-3.0 through FreeBSD-4.8, > so you shouldn't have waited more than negative 4 years for it :-). > The strict implementation of this behaviour in these releases causes > priority inversion problems, but the problems apparently aren't very > important. The scaling of niceness was re-broken in -current about 3 > years ago to "fix" the priority inversion problems. I should have realized that "a long time" would mean different things to different people, with respect to HEAD. I remember being involved in a flamefest on this issue a few years back. You were involved too. :-) However, are you sure the "nice 20 only gets unwanted CPU" behaviour is actually what you get in RELENG_4 (as opposed to your heavily patched version)? Ciao, Sheldon.