From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: pwil3058@bigpond.net.au, Alexander.Povolotsky@marconi.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, rml@tech9.net,
mingo@elte.hu, kernel@kolivas.org, elladan@eskimo.com,
cks@utcc.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: Maximum frequency of re-scheduling (minimum time quantum ) que stio n
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 18:57:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040708185726.1c375176.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40EDF8F5.2060808@yahoo.com.au>
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> However well tested your scheduler might be, it needs several
> orders of magnitude more testing ;) Maybe the best we can hope
> for is compile time selectable alternatives.
At this stage in the kernel lifecycle, for something as fiddly as the CPU
scheduler we really should be 100% driven by problem reporting.
If someone can identify a particular misbehaviour in the CPU scheduler then
they should put their editor away and work to produce a solid testcase.
Armed with that, we can then identify the source of the particular problem.
It is at this point, and no earlier, that we can decide what an appropriate
solution is. We then balance the risk of that solution against the severity
of the problem which it solves and make a decision as to whether to proceed.
Right now, the ratio of quality bug reporting to scheduler patching is
bizarrely small.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-09 2:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-08 13:01 Re: Maximum frequency of re-scheduling (minimum time quantum ) que stio n Povolotsky, Alexander
2004-07-08 23:32 ` Peter Williams
2004-07-08 23:41 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-09 1:46 ` Nick Piggin
2004-07-09 1:57 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-07-09 4:18 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-09 4:48 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-09 3:04 ` Peter Williams
[not found] <320586863@toto.iv>
2004-07-13 0:20 ` peterc
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-07-07 9:48 Maximum frequency of re-scheduling (minimum time quantum) " Povolotsky, Alexander
2004-07-07 15:52 ` Elladan
2004-07-07 7:59 Povolotsky, Alexander
2004-07-07 8:30 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2004-07-07 8:59 ` Elladan
2004-07-07 10:26 ` Con Kolivas
[not found] <313680C9A886D511A06000204840E1CF08F42FD4@whq-msgusr-02.pit .comms.marconi.com>
2004-07-05 15:33 ` Mike Galbraith
2004-07-05 14:18 Povolotsky, Alexander
2004-07-05 23:26 ` 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=20040708185726.1c375176.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=Alexander.Povolotsky@marconi.com \
--cc=cks@utcc.utoronto.ca \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=elladan@eskimo.com \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
/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.