Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 23:43:13 +0100 From: RW via freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Periodic rant about SCHED_ULE Message-ID: <20210721234313.4708c58d@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <5482bee3-e033-c605-b380-ca3493be7492@FreeBSD.org> References: <13445948-7804-20b4-4ae6-aaac14d11e87@m5p.com> <20210708101907.0be3a3c2@rimwks.local> <20210714164745.0128ea15@gumby.homeunix.com> <b24a2124-fd4a-0ae6-944e-4d39d590794c@heuristicsystems.com.au> <8239e474-fc36-b8aa-93b7-39197534cd30@heuristicsystems.com.au> <20210719013743.0590b1f2@gumby.homeunix.com> <5482bee3-e033-c605-b380-ca3493be7492@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:14:34 +0300 Andriy Gapon wrote: > On 19/07/2021 03:37, RW via freebsd-hackers wrote: > > I haven't got time to look into this in detail but from a cursory > > examination it looks like there must be some kind of translation > > between the PRI values seen in top and the priorities used in the > > scheduler. > > Yes. top's priority is the real priority - 100. The test for preemption is pri <= preempt_thresh I suspect that the defaults have been set up on the assumption of pri < preempt_thresh With and without FULL_PREEMPTION the defaults are 224 and 80 respectively. Both of these are one level outside a range. There may possibly be a good reason for 80, but 224 means that one idle level is included.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20210721234313.4708c58d>