From: Mike Kravetz <kravetz@us.ibm.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] 2.5.0 Multi-Queue Scheduler
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:31:52 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011209143152.A1087@w-mikek2.sequent.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011207143415.B1127@w-mikek2.des.beaverton.ibm.com> <E16Cg7a-0001CR-00@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <E16Cg7a-0001CR-00@the-village.bc.nu>; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 11:58:22AM +0000
On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 11:58:22AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Which version of the scheduler do you behave like ?
The 'current'. In this case 2.5.0. This work was mostly
interested in changing data structure layout and algorithms
used to make scheduling decisions. We still wanted to make
the same decision, just more efficiently when faced with
a high rate of scheduling decisions or large number of runnable
tasks. Like I said earlier, this design constraint was
both good and bad.
> I have the core bits of a scheduler that behaves roughly like Linux 2.4 with
> the recent Ingo cache change [in fact that came from working out what the
> Linus scheduler does].
>
> Uniprocessor scheduling is working fine (I've not tackled the RT stuff tho)
> SMP I'm pondering bits still.
>
> Currently I do the following
>
> Two sets of 8 queues per processor, and a bitmask of non empty queues.
I assume the queue a task is assigned to is based on its priority?
Or am I way off. Are there 8 ranges of priorities for runnable tasks?
Just curious how you came up with 8. We also dabbled with a scheduler
that had queues based on task priority. One issue was that we couldn't
seem to come up with an optimal number of queues to represent all task
priorities.
--
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-09 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-07 22:34 [RFC][PATCH] 2.5.0 Multi-Queue Scheduler Mike Kravetz
2001-12-08 11:58 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-08 23:42 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-09 22:31 ` Mike Kravetz [this message]
2001-12-09 23:51 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-09 22:53 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-12-10 0:10 ` Alan Cox
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=20011209143152.A1087@w-mikek2.sequent.com \
--to=kravetz@us.ibm.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.