From: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
Ed Sweetman <ed.sweetman@wmich.edu>,
Eugene Teo <eugene.teo@eugeneteo.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kernel@kolivas.org
Subject: Re: Ingo Molnar and Con Kolivas 2.6 scheduler patches
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:28:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308061728.04447.rob@landley.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200307271046.30318.phillips@arcor.de>
On Sunday 27 July 2003 11:46, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> The definition of a realtime scheduler is that the worst case latency is
> bounded. The current crop of interactive tweaks do not do that. So we
> need a scheduler with a bounded worst case. Davide Libenzi's recent patch
> that implements a new SCHED_SOFTRR scheduler policy, usable by non-root
> users, provides such a bound. Please don't lose sight of the fact that
> this is the correct solution to the problem, and that interactive tweaking,
> while it may produce good results for some or even most users in some or
> even most situations, will never magically transform Linux into an
> operating system that an audiophile could love.
Thinking out loud for a bit, please tell me if I'm wrong about SCHED_SOFTRR...
Whatever the policy is, there's only so many ticks to go around and there is
an overload for which it will fail. No resource allocation scheme can
prevent starvation if there simply isn't enough of the resource to go around.
So, how does SCHED_SOFTRR fail? Theoretically there is a minimum timeslice
you can hand out, yes? And an upper bound on scheduling latency. So
logically, there is some maximum number "N" of SCHED_SOFTRR tasks running at
once where you wind up round-robining with minimal timeslices and the system
is saturated. At N+1, you fall over. (And in reality, there are interrupts
and kernel threads and other things going on that get kind of cramped
somewhere below N.)
In theory, the real benefit of SCHED_SOFTRR is that an attempt to switch to it
can fail with -EMYBRAINISMELTING up front, so you know when it won't work at
the start, rather than having it glitch halfway through the run. At which
point half the fun becomes policy decisions about how to allocate the finite
number of SCHED_SOFTRR slots between however many users are trying to use the
system, which gets into Alan Cox's accounting work...
Sorry if this is old hat; I'm still a week and change behind on the list, but
catching up... :)
Rob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-07 4:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-26 9:30 Ingo Molnar and Con Kolivas 2.6 scheduler patches Felipe Alfaro Solana
2003-07-26 9:46 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
2003-07-26 10:02 ` Ismael Valladolid Torres
2003-07-26 10:10 ` Eugene Teo
2003-07-26 11:24 ` Ed Sweetman
2003-07-26 17:00 ` Rahul Karnik
2003-07-27 15:46 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-07-26 16:52 ` Diego Calleja García
2003-07-26 18:35 ` Andrew Morton
2003-07-26 23:01 ` Diego Calleja García
2003-07-28 9:38 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2003-07-28 10:37 ` Måns Rullgård
2003-07-28 17:06 ` Diego Calleja García
2003-07-27 2:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-27 7:39 ` Willy Tarreau
2003-07-27 9:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-07-27 11:54 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-27 20:18 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-07-26 22:05 ` Ed Sweetman
2003-08-01 15:38 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-07-31 23:02 ` Ed Sweetman
2003-07-27 2:39 ` Ed Sweetman
2003-07-29 13:56 ` Timothy Miller
2003-07-29 13:57 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-29 15:30 ` Timothy Miller
2003-07-29 15:52 ` Helge Hafting
2003-07-29 16:26 ` Timothy Miller
2003-07-30 14:46 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-07-29 15:40 ` Timothy Miller
2003-07-30 16:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-08-08 21:09 ` Bill Huey
2003-08-06 21:28 ` Rob Landley [this message]
2003-08-07 9:34 ` Helge Hafting
2003-08-07 15:42 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-08-07 20:45 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-07 20:51 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-07 21:40 ` Ed Sweetman
2003-08-07 22:17 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-08 0:01 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-09 20:52 ` George Anzinger
2003-08-14 0:24 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-14 8:01 ` George Anzinger
2003-08-16 9:10 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-16 14:29 ` APM and 2.5.75 not resuming properly Jamie Lokier
2003-08-16 15:03 ` Stephen Rothwell
2003-08-16 16:12 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-08-16 20:43 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-13 3:38 ` Ingo Molnar and Con Kolivas 2.6 scheduler patches George Anzinger
2003-08-08 6:08 ` Daniel Phillips
2003-07-26 12:08 ` Ismael Valladolid Torres
2003-07-26 14:54 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-26 14:49 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-26 14:47 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-26 16:42 ` Lou Langholtz
2003-07-26 16:40 ` Jens Axboe
2003-07-26 18:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-07-26 18:31 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
2003-07-26 19:20 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-07-26 19:47 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-07-27 9:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-07-27 9:57 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-27 10:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-07-27 10:19 ` Con Kolivas
2003-07-28 22:44 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-26 14:44 Downing, Thomas
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=200308061728.04447.rob@landley.net \
--to=rob@landley.net \
--cc=ed.sweetman@wmich.edu \
--cc=eugene.teo@eugeneteo.net \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillips@arcor.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox