From: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>
To: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:45:45 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200607260745.45156.a1426z@gawab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44C6BC76.8010808@bigpond.net.au>
Peter Williams wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> > Peter Williams wrote:
> >> Al Boldi wrote:
> >>> Peter Williams wrote:
> >>>> Al Boldi wrote:
>
> [bits deleted]
>
> >>>>> It may be really great, to allow schedulers perPid parent, thus
> >>>>> allowing the stacking of different scheduler semantics. This could
> >>>>> aid flexibility a lot.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm don't understand what you mean here. Could you elaborate?
> >>>
> >>> i.e: Boot the kernel with spa_no_frills, then start X with spa_ws.
> >>
> >> It's probably not a good idea to have different schedulers managing the
> >> same resource. The way to do different scheduling per process is to
> >> use the scheduling policy mechanism i.e. SCHED_FIFO, SCHED_RR, etc.
> >> (possibly extended) within each scheduler. On the other hand, on an
> >> SMP system, having a different scheduler on each run queue (or sub set
> >> of queues) might be interesting :-).
> >
> > What's wrong with multiple run-queues on UP?
>
> A really high likelihood of starvation of some tasks.
Maybe you are thinking of running independent run-queues, in which case it
would probably be unwise to run multiple RQs on a single CPU.
But I was more thinking of a run-queue of run-queues, with the masterRQ
scheduling slaveRQs, each RQ possible running its own scheduling semantic.
Thanks!
--
Al
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-26 4:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-24 15:57 [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2 Al Boldi
2006-07-25 2:44 ` Peter Williams
2006-07-25 4:57 ` Al Boldi
2006-07-25 5:44 ` Peter Williams
2006-07-25 18:27 ` Al Boldi
2006-07-25 19:40 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-07-26 4:45 ` Al Boldi
2006-07-26 11:28 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-07-26 0:51 ` Peter Williams
2006-07-26 4:45 ` Al Boldi [this message]
2006-07-26 5:14 ` Peter Williams
2006-07-26 11:23 ` Al Boldi
2006-07-26 12:34 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-07-26 14:04 ` Al Boldi
2006-07-27 1:32 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-07-21 3:24 Peter Williams
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=200607260745.45156.a1426z@gawab.com \
--to=a1426z@gawab.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
/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).