Con Kolivas wrote:
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 05:24 pm, Peter Williams wrote:
This patch implements a prototype version of a simplified interactive
bonus mechanism. The mechanism does not attempt to identify interactive
---
Your comments on this proposal are requested.
---
If we're going to redo the interactivity estimator I happen to have a whole
cpu scheduler design that is interactive by design without being a state
machine that I've been hacking / maintining / debugging for 2 years that many
people are already using in production...
What do you mean interactive by design (presumably as opposed
to the current scheduler which is not interactive by design)?
And what do you mean by not being a state machine?
Back on topic: I don't think that this patch isn't clearly
better than what currently exists, nor would require less
testing than any other large scale changes to the scheduler
behaviour.
So, as Con seems to imply, it is JASW (just another scheduler
rewrite). Not that there's anything wrong with that... except
it is not really a good fix for a problem with the current
scheduler.
Thanks,
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
