Re: [PATCH] Getting and setting SEDF scheduling parameters

[Stephan Diestelhorst <sd386@cl.cam.ac.uk>]

Thanks for that,
I'll have a look at it!

Stephan

John L Griffin wrote:

>Here is a new patch to reflect Keir's directions from last Friday.  Note 
>that the patch only addresses the GET/PUT_INFO logic (not the correctness 
>of the scheduler proper) but the scheduler seems to indeed be doing the 
>right thing.
>
>This patch:
>
>1. Fixes an underflow bug in sedf_adjust_weights() that would cause the 
><slice> for a weight-driven domain to be set to a really big number if the 
>CPU was already overcommitted.
>
>2. Clarifies the logic in sedf_adjdom().  Whenever (weight==0), 
>time-driven scheduling is selected.  Otherwise, weight-driven scheduling 
>is selected.  Extratime scheduling works for both modes.  [Note to Keir: 
>in re your question, real-time weights only divvy up the spare 
>non-time-sliced time according to the predetermined schedule.]
>
>3. Adds a heap of comments to the code, including five examples of how one 
>might set the scheduling parameters.  Each of the five examples has been 
>non-rigorously tested to work as described, but additional testing is 
>warranted.
>
>One additional change I recommend is to add printk()'s to sedf_adjdom() 
>that indicate the failure of a scheduling operation, and possibly to 
>indicate success as well, but that's not included in this patch.
>
>Signed-off-by: jlg@us.ibm.com
>
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>  
>