On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>> If you remember, with 50/50, I noticed some difficulties to fork many
>> processes. I think that during a fork(), the parent has a higher probability
>> of forking other processes than the child. So at least, we should use
>> something like 67/33 or 75/25 for parent/child.
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:34:07AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> It would be even better to simply have the rule:
> - child gets almost no points at startup
> - but when a parent does a "waitpid()" call and blocks, it will spread
> out its points to the childred (the "vfork()" blocking is another case
> that is really the same).
> This is a very special kind of "priority inversion" logic: you give higher
> priority to the things you wait for. Not because of holding any locks, but
> simply because a blockign waitpid really is a damn big hint that "ok, the
> child now works for the parent".
An in-kernel scheduler API might help. void yield_to(struct task_struct *)?
A userspace API might be nice, too. e.g. int sched_yield_to(pid_t).
-- wli
-
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]
