Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Ting Yang <tingy@cs.umass.edu> wrote:

>  My name is Ting Yang, a graduate student from UMASS. I am currently 
> studying the linux scheduler and virtual memory manager to solve some 
> page swapping problems. I am very excited with the new scheduler CFS. 
> After I read through your code, I think that you might be interested 
> in reading this paper:

thanks for your detailed analysis - it was very interesting!

>  Based on my understanding, adopting something like EEVDF in CFS 
> should not be very difficult given their similarities, although I do 
> not have any idea on how this impacts the load balancing for SMP. Does 
> this worth a try?

It would definitely be interesting to try! I dont think it should 
negatively impact load balancing on SMP. The current fork-time behavior 
of CFS is really just a first-approximation thing, and what you propose 
seems to make more sense to me too because it preserves the fluidity of 
fairness. (I'd probably apply your patch even if there was no directly 
measurable impact on workloads, because the more natural approaches tend 
to be more maintainable in the long run.)

So by all means, please feel free to do a patch for this.

>  Sorry for such a long email :-)

it made alot of sense and was very useful :-)

	Ingo
-
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/