From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753686AbXDOUTT (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:19:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753698AbXDOUTT (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:19:19 -0400 Received: from waste.org ([66.93.16.53]:52077 "EHLO waste.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753681AbXDOUTS (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:19:18 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:05:35 -0500 From: Matt Mackall To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Con Kolivas , Peter Williams , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Nick Piggin , Mike Galbraith , Arjan van de Ven , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] Message-ID: <20070415200535.GC11166@waste.org> References: <20070413202100.GA9957@elte.hu> <200704151327.13589.kernel@kolivas.org> <20070415150536.GA6623@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070415150536.GA6623@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > so the rejection was on these grounds, and i still very much stand by > that position here and today: i didnt want to see the Linux scheduler > landscape balkanized and i saw no technological reasons for the > complication that external modularization brings. But "balkanization" is a good thing. "Monoculture" is a bad thing. Look at what happened with I/O scheduling. Opening things up to some new ideas by making it possible to select your I/O scheduler took us from 10 years of stagnation to healthy, competitive development, which gave us a substantially better I/O scheduler. Look at what's happening right now with TCP congestion algorithms. We've had decades of tweaking Reno slightly now turned into a vibrant research area with lots of radical alternatives. A winner will eventually emerge and it will probably look quite a bit different than Reno. Similar things have gone on since the beginning with filesystems on Linux. Being able to easily compare filesystems head to head has been immensely valuable in improving our 'core' Linux filesystems. And what we've had up to now is a scheduler monoculture. Until Andrew put RSDL in -mm, if people wanted to experiment with other schedulers, they had to go well off the beaten path to do it. So all the people who've been hopelessy frustrated with the mainline scheduler go off to the -ck ghetto, or worse, stick with 2.4. Whether your motivations have been protectionist or merely shortsighted, you've stomped pretty heavily on alternative scheduler development by completely rejecting the whole plugsched concept. If we'd opened up mainline to a variety of schedulers _3 years ago_, we'd probably have gotten to where we are today much sooner. Hopefully, the next time Rik suggests pluggable page replacement algorithms, folks will actually seriously consider it. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.