All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: luca abeni <luca.abeni@unitn.it>
To: Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
	Daniel Bistrot de Oliveira <danielbristot@gmail.com>,
	Henrik Austad <henrik@austad.us>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"al.biondi@sssup.it" <al.biondi@sssup.it>
Subject: Re: [RFD] sched/deadline: Support single CPU affinity
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 15:34:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161110153413.6900aa2b@sweethome> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <03a30c9c-eb42-c5c6-b94d-3a62048d8642@sssup.it>

On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:03:47 +0100
Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it> wrote:

> On 10/11/2016 10:06, luca abeni wrote:
> > is equivalent to the "least laxity first" (LLF) algorithm.
> > Giving precedence to tasks with 0 laxity is a technique that is
> > often used to improve the schedulability on multi-processor
> > systems.  
> 
> EDZL (EDF / Zero Laxity first), right?
Yes, basically all the "ZL" algorithms (EDZL, but I think I've also
seen something like RMZL or similar).

> AFAICR, there's quite a lot of
> analysis on EDZL for multi-cores... eg, Insik Shin et al....
> 
>    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6374195
Yes, this is why I mentined the 0-laxity thing... Of course, here the
situation is different (there are tasks that can be migrated, and tasks
that cannot), but maybe the 0-laxity analysis can be adapted to this
case?


> But, before going the EDZL way, isn't it worthwhile to consider
> just splitting tasks among 2 cpus
> 
>    https://people.mpi-sws.org/~bbb/papers/pdf/rtss16b.pdf
Yes, there are many possible different strategies that can be tested (I
think somewhere I saw some semi-partitioned algorithm that was even
optimal). I suspect everything depends on the trade-off between
implementation complexity and scheduling efficiency.



				Luca


> 
> ? ... we're working at RETIS on simpler ways to make the AC for
> these split tasks cases (cc-ing Alessandro) that doesn't need
> demand-bound complex analysis...
> 
> My2c,
> 
> 	T.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-10 14:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-10  8:08 [RFD] sched/deadline: Support single CPU affinity Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-10  9:06 ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 10:59   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-10 12:27     ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 11:03   ` Tommaso Cucinotta
2016-11-10 14:34     ` luca abeni [this message]
2016-11-10 10:01 ` Tommaso Cucinotta
2016-12-13 10:21   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-15 11:30     ` Tommaso Cucinotta
2016-12-15 12:16       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-10 12:21 ` Henrik Austad
2016-11-10 12:38   ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 12:56     ` Henrik Austad
2016-11-10 14:23       ` luca abeni
2016-11-10 12:56   ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20161110153413.6900aa2b@sweethome \
    --to=luca.abeni@unitn.it \
    --cc=al.biondi@sssup.it \
    --cc=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
    --cc=danielbristot@gmail.com \
    --cc=henrik@austad.us \
    --cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it \
    /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.