* William Lee Irwin III <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:24:22AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > until now the main approach for nice levels in Linux was always:
> > "implement your main scheduling logic for nice 0 and then look for
> > some low-overhead method that can be glued to it that does something
> > that behaves like nice levels". Feel free to turn that around into a
> > more natural approach, but the algorithm should remain fairly simple
> > i think.
>
> Part of my insistence was because it seemed to be relatively close to
> a one-liner, though I'm not entirely sure what particular computation
> to use to handle the signedness of the keys. I guess I could pick some
> particular nice semantics myself and then sweep the extant schedulers
> to use them after getting a testcase hammered out.
i'd love to have a oneliner solution :-)
wrt. signedness: note that in v2 i have made rq_running signed, and most
calculations (especially those related to nice) are signed values. (On
64-bit systems this all isnt a big issue - most of the arithmetics
gymnastics in CFS are done to keep deltas within 32 bits, so that
divisions and multiplications are sane.)
Ingo
-
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]
