Re: [o(1) sched J0] higher priority smaller timeslices, in fact

Bill Davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:52:31 -0500 (EST)


On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote:

> I still suggest a different set as faster and more readable at least to
> me. Just two operations instead of 4!
>
> #define NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(n) (((n)+21)*(HZ/10)) // should be positive!
> #define MAX_TIMESLICE NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(19)
> #define MIN_TIMESLICE NICE_TO_TIMESLICE(-20)

Looks more readable. I wouldn't bet on faster, but definitely more
readable.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

- 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/