linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Boris Dragovic <lynx@falcon.etf.bg.ac.yu>,
	Oswald Buddenhagen <ob6@inf.tu-dresden.de>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: static scheduling - SCHED_IDLE?
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:26:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010309122618.A449@bug.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010307202027.B27421@ugly.wh8.tu-dresden.de> <Pine.LNX.4.20.0103081427040.3785-100000@falcon.etf.bg.ac.yu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0103081427040.3785-100000@falcon.etf.bg.ac.yu>; from Boris Dragovic on Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 02:29:06PM +0100

Hi!

> > did "these" apply only to the tasks, that actually hold a lock?
> > if not, then i don't like this idea, as it gives the processes
> > time for the only reason, that it _might_ hold a lock. this basically 
> > undermines the idea of static classes. in this case, we could actually
> > just make the "nice" scale incredibly large and possibly nonlinear, 
> > as mark suggested.
> 
> would it be possible to subqueue tasks that are holding a lock so that
> they get some guaranteed amount of cpu and just leave other to be executed
> when processor really idle?

There was implementation which promoted SCHED_IDLE task to normal
priority whenever it entered syscall. I liked it.
								Pavel
-- 
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org

      parent reply	other threads:[~2001-03-10 15:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-07 17:40 static scheduling - SCHED_IDLE? Oswald Buddenhagen
2001-03-07 18:04 ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-07 19:20   ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2001-03-07 21:34     ` ludovic
2001-03-08 11:17       ` Zdenek Kabelac
2001-03-08 11:41         ` Andrew Morton
2001-03-08 13:29     ` Boris Dragovic
2001-03-08 13:44       ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-08 20:19         ` Boris Dragovic
2001-03-08 20:47           ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-09 19:38             ` george anzinger
2001-03-09 20:19               ` Adrian Cox
2001-03-12 18:05                 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-03-12 19:37                   ` Adrian Cox
2001-03-13  9:40                     ` Jamie Lokier
2001-03-10  2:58               ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-09 19:42             ` Jamie Lokier
2001-03-10  3:02               ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-09 20:09                 ` Jamie Lokier
2001-03-10  4:56                   ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-14 13:19                     ` Jamie Lokier
2001-03-15  3:13                       ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-14 14:26                   ` Philipp Rumpf
2001-03-09 11:26       ` Pavel Machek [this message]

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=20010309122618.A449@bug.ucw.cz \
    --to=pavel@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lynx@falcon.etf.bg.ac.yu \
    --cc=ob6@inf.tu-dresden.de \
    --cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
    /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).