From: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>
To: "'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@elte.hu>, Andy Isaacson <adi@hexapodia.org>
Cc: "Larry McVoy" <lm@bitmover.com>,
"Peter Wächtler" <pwaechtler@mac.com>,
"Bill Davidsen" <davidsen@tmr.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: 1:1 threading vs. scheduler activations (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:49:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A46BBDB345A7D5118EC90002A5072C78052F7406@orsmsx116.jf.intel.com> (raw)
> and there are some things that i'm not at all sure can be fixed in any
> reasonable way - eg. RT scheduling. [the userspace library
> would have to
> raise/drop the priority of threads in the userspace
> scheduler, causing an
> additional kernel entry/exit, eliminating even the
> theoretical advantage
> it had for pure user<->user context switches.]
So far, the only reasonable way I have found to put RT *scheduling* on NGPT
has been to modify the priority queues on the scheduler [using a simplified
model of your O(1) scheduler]. That gives you, at least, "real time" versus
the other threads. If you want it versus the whole system, then you can
change the attrs of the thread to be SYSTEM scope, so that they compete for
system resources against everybody else [of course, this is cheating, it is
falling back to 1:1 for the real time case].
There are rough edges still, for mutex (futex) waiter selection, signal
delivery, etc ... but so far, I think it is the best sollution [and I'd love
to hear others :)].
Inaky Perez-Gonzalez -- Not speaking for Intel - opinions are my own [or my
fault]
next reply other threads:[~2002-09-24 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-24 16:49 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-09-23 23:57 [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1 Andy Isaacson
2002-09-24 6:32 ` 1:1 threading vs. scheduler activations (was: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1) Ingo Molnar
2002-09-25 3:08 ` Bill Huey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=A46BBDB345A7D5118EC90002A5072C78052F7406@orsmsx116.jf.intel.com \
--to=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
--cc=adi@hexapodia.org \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pwaechtler@mac.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).