From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: "Povolotsky, Alexander" <Alexander.Povolotsky@marconi.com>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'Mike Galbraith'" <efault@gmx.de>,
"'akpm@osdl.org'" <akpm@osdl.org>,
"'rml@tech9.net'" <rml@tech9.net>,
"'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"'Con Kolivas'" <kernel@kolivas.org>,
"'Elladan'" <elladan@eskimo.com>,
"'Chris Siebenmann'" <cks@utcc.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: Maximum frequency of re-scheduling (minimum time quantum ) que stio n
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:41:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040708234125.GQ21066@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40EDD980.4040608@bigpond.net.au>
Povolotsky, Alexander wrote:
>> Is there a chance such functionality will make into Linux 2.6 as a patch
>> (at some later time) ?
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 09:32:16AM +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Not until the current scheduler is replaced with a single priority array
> scheduler. However, if there's enough interest, I could add this
> functionality to the CPU scheduler evaluation patch so that people could
> experiment with it (BUT it would be at the bottom of my to do list).
Well, this is in part because it makes the assumption of such a data
structure and then does if (scheduler_type == FOO) { /* FOO's thing */ }
in the midst of various manipulations of the struture instead of having
methods for higher-level scheduler operations.
As certain reputable news sources have said, I wish people would write
more ambitious scheduler patches. =)
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-08 23:42 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 [this message]
2004-07-09 1:46 ` Nick Piggin
2004-07-09 1:57 ` Andrew Morton
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=20040708234125.GQ21066@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=Alexander.Povolotsky@marconi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--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=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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox