From: "Marc E. Fiuczynski" <mef@CS.Princeton.EDU>
To: "Jens Axboe" <axboe@suse.de>, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
Cc: "Peter Williams" <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Con Kolivas" <kernel@kolivas.org>,
"Chris Han" <xiphux@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] plugsched-2.0 patches ...
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:29:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <NIBBJLJFDHPDIBEEKKLPIEDNDIAA.mef@cs.princeton.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050121141136.GG2790@suse.de>
Paraphrasing Jens Axboe:
> I don't think you can compare [plugsched with the plugio framework].
> Yes they are both schedulers, but that's about where the 'similarity'
> stops. The CPU scheduler must be really fast, overhead must be kept
> to a minimum. For a disk scheduler, we can affort to burn cpu cycles
> to increase the io performance. The extra abstraction required to
> fully modularize the cpu scheduler would come at a non-zero cost as
> well, but I bet it would have a larger impact there. I doubt you
> could measure the difference in the disk scheduler.
Modularization usually is done through a level of indirection (function
pointers). I have a can of "indirection be gone" almost ready to spray over
the plugsched framework that would reduce the overhead to zero at runtime.
I'd be happy to finish that work if it makes it more palpable to integrate a
plugsched framework into the kernel?
Marc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-21 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-20 1:23 [ANNOUNCE][RFC] plugsched-2.0 patches Peter Williams
2005-01-20 1:58 ` Kasper Sandberg
2005-01-20 16:14 ` Marc E. Fiuczynski
2005-01-20 17:51 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2005-01-21 14:11 ` Jens Axboe
2005-01-21 16:29 ` Marc E. Fiuczynski [this message]
2005-01-21 16:43 ` Con Kolivas
2005-01-21 21:20 ` Peter Williams
2005-01-21 2:38 ` Peter Williams
2005-01-21 2:50 ` Marc E. Fiuczynski
2005-01-21 15:16 ` [ckrm-tech] " Shailabh Nagar
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=NIBBJLJFDHPDIBEEKKLPIEDNDIAA.mef@cs.princeton.edu \
--to=mef@cs.princeton.edu \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=xiphux@gmail.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).