Re: [RFC 3/5] sched: Add CPU rate hard caps

[Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>]

On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 10:16 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 23:59 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> >> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >>> On Friday 26 May 2006 14:20, Peter Williams wrote:
> >>>> This patch implements hard CPU rate caps per task as a proportion of a
> >>>> single CPU's capacity expressed in parts per thousand.
> >>> A hard cap of 1/1000 could lead to interesting starvation scenarios where a 
> >>> mutex or semaphore was held by a task that hardly ever got cpu. Same goes to 
> >>> a lesser extent to a 0 soft cap. 
> >>>
> >>> Here is how I handle idleprio tasks in current -ck:
> >>>
> >>> http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/pre-releases/2.6.17-rc5/2.6.17-rc5-ck1/patches/track_mutexes-1.patch
> >>> tags tasks that are holding a mutex
> >>>
> >>> http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/pre-releases/2.6.17-rc5/2.6.17-rc5-ck1/patches/sched-idleprio-1.7.patch
> >>> is the idleprio policy for staircase.
> >>>
> >>> What it does is runs idleprio tasks as normal tasks when they hold a mutex or 
> >>> are waking up after calling down() (ie holding a semaphore).
> >> I wasn't aware that you could detect those conditions.  They could be 
> >> very useful.
> > 
> > Isn't this exactly what the PI code is there to handle?  Is something
> > more than PI needed?
> > 
> 
> AFAIK (but I may be wrong) PI is only used by RT tasks and would need to 
> be extended.  It could be argued that extending PI so that it can be 
> used by non RT tasks is a worthwhile endeavour in its own right.

Hm.  Looking around a bit, it appears to me that we're one itty bitty
redefine away from PI being global.  No idea if/when that will happen
though.

	-Mike

-
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/