From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S932160AbZDIMFZ@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932160AbZDIMFZ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:05:25 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759579AbZDIMFJ
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:05:09 -0400
Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:45811 "EHLO hera.kernel.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1759536AbZDIMFH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:05:07 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFC] Static/Runtime CPU/IO bound scheduling polices based on
 CPU(s) to support complete spectrum of tasks
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
       David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
       Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1239277099.7647.345.camel@twins>
References: <1239099931.4773.25.camel@ht.satnam>
	 <20090407105835.GP17934@one.firstfloor.org>
	 <1239103951.4773.29.camel@ht.satnam>  <1239272776.3028.11.camel@ht.satnam>
	 <1239277099.7647.345.camel@twins>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:32:59 +0530
Message-Id: <1239278579.11859.3.camel@ht.satnam>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 (2.24.5-1.fc10) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 13:38 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 15:56 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 17:02 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 12:58 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 03:55:31PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > > I am planning to prepare the followings:
> > > > 
> > > > This seems all quite vague. Perhaps it would be good if you started
> > > > with a clear definition what problem you're trying to solve.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > I do not surprise, if this approach seems vague to many developers
> > because this is many years ahead of time.
> 
> Yes, or not.
> 
> For partitioning we have cpusets, for scheduler policies we have
> sched_setscheduler().
> 
> The only thing we do not have are deadline schedulers, but people are
> working on that -- its a rather complex piece of work.
> 
> The rest of you babbling is hand-waving about heuristics.

I do not know what you read and what you understand.

Can we change the schedulers at runtime ?

Can we specify:
 Task 1-100: Scheduler1
 Task 101-200: Scheduler2

--
JSR