From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPU scheduler: Simplified interactive bonus mechanism
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:47:00 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43B242F4.3050004@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200512281735.00992.kernel@kolivas.org>
Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 05:24 pm, Peter Williams wrote:
>
>>This patch implements a prototype version of a simplified interactive
>>bonus mechanism. The mechanism does not attempt to identify interactive
>
>
>>---
>>
>>Your comments on this proposal are requested.
>>
>>---
>
>
> If we're going to redo the interactivity estimator I happen to have a whole
> cpu scheduler design that is interactive by design without being a state
> machine that I've been hacking / maintining / debugging for 2 years that many
> people are already using in production...
>
What do you mean interactive by design (presumably as opposed
to the current scheduler which is not interactive by design)?
And what do you mean by not being a state machine?
Back on topic: I don't think that this patch isn't clearly
better than what currently exists, nor would require less
testing than any other large scale changes to the scheduler
behaviour.
So, as Con seems to imply, it is JASW (just another scheduler
rewrite). Not that there's anything wrong with that... except
it is not really a good fix for a problem with the current
scheduler.
Thanks,
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-28 7:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-28 6:24 [RFC] CPU scheduler: Simplified interactive bonus mechanism Peter Williams
2005-12-28 6:35 ` Con Kolivas
2005-12-28 7:47 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2005-12-29 3:51 ` Peter Williams
2005-12-29 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-29 8:22 ` Nick Piggin
2005-12-28 8:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-28 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-28 13:16 ` Peter Williams
2006-01-03 0:55 ` 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=43B242F4.3050004@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
/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