Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy

[Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>]

Randy.Dunlap wrote:

>>Hi,
>>Patch against 2.6.0-test4. It fixes a lot of problems here vs
>>previous versions. There aren't really any open issues for me, so
>>testers would be welcome.
>>
>>
>...
>
>>On the other hand, I expect the best cases and maybe most usual cases would
>>be better on Con's... and Con might have since done some work in the latency
>>area.
>>
>
>Has anyone developed a (run-time) scheduler [policy] selector, via
>sysctl or sysfs, so that different kernel builds aren't required?
>
>I know that I have heard discussions of this previously.
>

Not that I know of. This would probably require an extra layer of
indirection in the standard form of Linux's struct of pointers to
functions, with your standard schedule functions as wrappers.
I think it would be highly unlikely that this would get into a
standard kernel, but might make a nice testing tool...

In fact this might end up being incompatible with architectures
like SPARC... but I'm sure someone could make it work if they really
wanted to.

I think the present boot-time selector (selecting different kernels
at boot) will have to suffice for now :P