From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Ting Yang <tingy@cs.umass.edu>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 10:48:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070502174829.GX19966@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070502173634.GA11308@in.ibm.com>
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:57:14PM -0400, Ting Yang wrote:
>> "A Proportional Share REsource Allocation Algorithm for Real-Time,
>> Time-Shared Systems", by Ion Stoica. You can find the paper here:
>> http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/37752.html
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:06:34PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> Good paper ..thanks for the pointer.
> I briefly went thr' the paper and my impression is it expect each task
> to specify the length of each new request it initiates. Is that correct?
> If we have to apply EEVDF to SCHED_NORMAL task scheduling under CFS, how
> would we calculate that "length of each new request" (which is reqd
> before we calculate its virtual deadline)?
l_i and w_i are both functions of the priority. You essentially arrange
l_i to express QoS wrt. latency, and w_i to express QoS wrt. bandwidth.
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:57:14PM -0400, Ting Yang wrote:
>> EXAMPLE: assume the system runs at 1000 tick/second, i.e. 1ms a tick,
>> and the granularity of pre-exemption for CFS is 5 virtual ticks (the
>> current setting). If, at time t=0, we start 2 tasks: p1 and p2, both
>> have nice value 0 (weight 1024), and rq->fair_clock is initialized to 0.
>> Now we have:
>> p1->fair_key = p2->fair_key = rq->fair_clock = 0.
>> CFS breaks the tie arbitrarily, say it executes p1. After 1 system tick
>> (1ms later) t=1, we have:
>> rq->fair_clock = 1/2, p1->fair_key = 1, p2->fair_key = 0.
>> Suppose, a new task p3 starts with nice value -10 at this moment, that
>> is p3->fair_key=1/2. In this case, CFS will not schedule p3 for
>> execution until the fair_keys of p1 and p2 go beyond 5+1/2 (which
>> translates to about 10ms later in this setting), _regardless_ the
>> priority (weight) of p3.
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:06:34PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> There is also p->wait_runtime which is taken into account when
> calculating p->fair_key. So if p3 had waiting in runqueue for long
> before, it can get to run quicker than 10ms later.
Virtual time is time from the task's point of view, which it has spent
executing. ->wait_runtime is a device to subtract out time spent on the
runqueue but not running from what would otherwise be virtual time to
express lag, whether deliberately or coincidentally. ->wait_runtime
would not be useful for EEVDF AFAICT, though it may be interesting to
report.
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-02 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-01 21:22 [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8 Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 2:57 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-02 5:10 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-05-02 5:30 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-02 10:05 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-02 10:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 17:36 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-05-02 17:48 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2007-05-02 18:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 18:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-02 19:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 19:42 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-03 2:48 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 3:18 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 10:19 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-02 23:41 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-02 18:42 ` Li, Tong N
2007-05-02 19:10 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-03 3:07 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 8:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03 14:26 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-05-03 15:19 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 15:02 ` Ting Yang
2007-05-02 6:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-05-02 6:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 8:03 ` Gene Heskett
2007-05-02 8:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-05-02 8:48 ` Gene Heskett
2007-05-02 8:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 8:51 ` Gene Heskett
2007-05-02 7:59 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-05-02 8:11 ` Gene Heskett
2007-05-02 10:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 9:08 ` Balbir Singh
2007-05-02 10:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-02 10:59 ` Balbir Singh
2007-05-02 11:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-05 8:31 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-05 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-06 8:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-06 8:36 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-05-06 8:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-06 17:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-07 11:30 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-07 15:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-07 16:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-08 0:35 ` Peter Williams
2007-05-08 9:05 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-09 0:01 ` Peter Williams
2007-05-10 13:09 ` Pavel Machek
2007-05-11 16:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-11 19:18 ` Pavel Machek
2007-05-11 19:37 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-05-11 20:53 ` Kevin Bowling
2007-05-07 11:09 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-07 16:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-07 18:39 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2007-05-07 18:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-08 7:34 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-08 9:54 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2007-05-08 10:27 ` Esben Nielsen
2007-05-08 5:36 ` Matt Mackall
2007-05-02 12:58 ` Mark Lord
2007-05-02 12:58 ` Vegard Nossum
2007-05-02 16:41 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-05-03 8:20 Zoltan Boszormenyi
2007-05-03 13:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03 13:29 ` Damien Wyart
2007-05-03 14:53 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-05-03 15:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-03 18:44 ` Li, Tong N
2007-05-03 19:52 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-07 14:22 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-05-07 20:54 ` Li, Tong N
2007-05-07 0:04 ` Bill Davidsen
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=20070502174829.GX19966@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tingy@cs.umass.edu \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/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