From: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.0 batch scheduling, HT aware
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:36:50 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FE79C32.6050104@cyberone.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200312231224.49069.kernel@kolivas.org>
Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:11, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>I think this patch is much too ugly to get into such an elegant scheduler.
>>No fault to you Con because its an ugly problem.
>>
>
>You're too kind. No it's ugly because of my code but it works for now.
>
Well its all the special cases for batch scheduling that I don't like,
the idea to not run batch tasks on a package running non batch processes
is sound. I thought the batch scheduling code is Ingo's, but I could
be mistaken. Anyway...
>
>>How about this: if a task is "delta" priority points below a task running
>>on another sibling, move it to that sibling (so priorities via timeslice
>>start working). I call it active unbalancing! I might be able to make it
>>fit if there is interest. Other suggestions?
>>
>
>I discussed this with Ingo and that's the sort of thing we thought of. Perhaps
>a relative crossover of 10 dynamic priorities and an absolute crossover of 5
>static priorities before things got queued together. This is really only
>required for the UP HT case.
>
Well I guess it would still be nice for "SMP HT" as well. Hopefully the code
can be generic enough that it would just carry over nicely. It does have
complications though because the load balancer would have to be taught about
it, and those architectures that do hardware priorities probably don't even
want it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-23 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-23 0:38 [PATCH] 2.6.0 batch scheduling, HT aware Con Kolivas
2003-12-23 1:11 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-23 1:24 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-23 1:36 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2003-12-23 2:42 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-23 2:57 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-23 3:15 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-23 3:16 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-26 23:03 ` Pavel Machek
2003-12-23 15:51 ` bill davidsen
2003-12-23 22:09 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-30 0:35 ` bill davidsen
2004-01-02 20:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-12-26 22:56 ` Pavel Machek
2003-12-26 23:42 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-26 23:49 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-27 11:09 ` Pavel Machek
2003-12-27 11:15 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-30 0:29 ` bill davidsen
2003-12-29 7:02 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-29 12:49 ` Pavel Machek
2003-12-27 8:52 ` Mika Penttilä
2003-12-30 0:32 ` bill davidsen
2004-01-02 20:05 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-01-02 20:56 ` Davide Libenzi
2004-01-02 21:10 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-01-02 23:34 ` Davide Libenzi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-23 1:59 Nakajima, Jun
2003-12-23 2:40 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-23 5:33 Nakajima, Jun
2003-12-23 10:13 ` Nick Piggin
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=3FE79C32.6050104@cyberone.com.au \
--to=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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