Con Kolivas wrote:
> Al Since you have an unhealthy interest in cpu schedulers you may also
> want to look at my ultimate fairness with mild interactivity builtin cpu
> scheduler I hacked on briefly. I was bored for a couple of days and came
> up with the design and hacked it together. I never got around to finishing
> it to live up fully to its design intent but it's working embarassingly
> well at the moment. It makes no effort to optimise for interactivity in
> anyw way. Maybe if I ever find some spare time I'll give it more polish
> and port it to plugsched. Ignore the lovely name I give it; the patch is
> for 2.6.16. It's a dual priority array rr scheduler that iterates over all
> priorities. This is as opposed to staircase which is a single priority
> array scheduler where the tasks themselves iterate over all priorities.
It's not bad, but it seems to allow cpu-hogs to steal left-over timeslices,
which increases unfairness as the proc load increases. Conditionalizing
prio-boosting based on hogginess maybe one way to compensate for this. This
would involve resisting any prio-change unless hogged, which should be
scaled by hogginess, something like SleepAVG but much simpler and less
fluctuating.
Really, the key to a successful scheduler would be to build it step by step
by way of abstraction, modularization, and extension. Starting w/ a
noop/RR-scheduler, each step would need to be analyzed for stability and
efficiency, before moving to the next step, thus exposing problems as you
move from step to step.
Thanks!
--
Al
-
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]
