On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 04:07 -0400, Chris Snook wrote:
> To clarify, I'm not suggesting that the "balance with cpu (x+1)%n only"
> algorithm is the only way to do this. Rather, I'm pointing out that
> even an extremely simple algorithm can give you fair loading when you
> already have CFS managing the runqueues. There are countless more
> sophisticated ways we could do this without using global locking, or
> possibly without any locking at all, other than the locking we already
> use during migration.
>
> -- Chris
Yes, as Andi and Chris also pointed out, I'll think about if global
synchronization can be removed or relaxed.
Thanks,
tong
-
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]
