From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752550AbXCQRWL (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:22:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752590AbXCQRWL (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:22:11 -0400 Received: from smtpout06-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net ([64.202.165.227]:58102 "HELO smtpout06.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752550AbXCQRWK (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:22:10 -0400 Message-ID: <45FC23C0.5070903@seclark.us> Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:22:08 -0400 From: Stephen Clark Reply-To: Stephen.Clark@seclark.us User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22smp i686; en-US; m18) Gecko/20010110 Netscape6/6.5 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Hahn CC: Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RSDL v0.31 References: <200703042335.26785.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070317074506.GA13685@elte.hu> <87fy84i7nn.fsf@depni.sinp.msu.ru> <200703172048.46267.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mark Hahn wrote: >>So in an attempt to summarise the situation, what are the advantages of RSDL >>over mainline. >> >>Fairness >> >> > >why do you think fairness is good, especially always good? > > > >>Starvation free >> >> > >even starvation is sometimes a good thing - there's a place for processes >that only use the CPU if it is otherwise idle. that is, they are >deliberately starved all the rest of the time. > > > >>Much lower and bound latencies >> >> > >in an average sense? also, under what circumstances does this actually >matter? (please don't offer something like RT audio on an overloaded machine- >that's operator error, not something to design for.) > > > >>Deterministic >> >> > >not a bad thing, but how does this make itself apparent and of value >to the user? I think everyone is extremely comfortable with non-determinism >(stemming from networks, caches, interleaved workloads, etc) > > > >>Better interactivity for the majority of cases. >> >> > >how is this measured? is this statement really just a reiteration of >the latency claim? > > > >>Now concentrating on the very last aspect since that seems to be the sticking >>point. >> >> > >nah, I think the fairness and latency claims are the real issues. >- >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/ > > > I guess I wonder what is wrong with the current scheduler? I am running 2.6.20.2 on a whitebook laptop with a core 2 duo 1.86ghz 2gb of mem with an intel 945 shared memory graphics processor. I am currently running X with beryl have vncserver connected to my main system, which I am using to write this email, I am running also firefox and both of ingo test programs. I also am running a make -j4 on a kernel rebuild without having any pauses or any problem doing anything interactively. So again what does this new scheduler fix? Steve -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Ben Franklin) "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." (Thomas Jefferson)