Re: [patch 2.6.16-rc4-mm1] Task Throttling V14

MIke Galbraith
2006-02-25T02:16:24Z

On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 12:16 +1100, Peter Williams wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > MIke Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> >>Not many comments came back, zero actually.
> >>
> >
> >
> > That's because everyone's terribly busy chasing down those final bugs so we
> > get a really great 2.6.16 release (heh, I kill me).
> >
> > I'm a bit reluctant to add changes like this until we get the smpnice stuff
> > settled down and validated. I guess that means once Ken's run all his
> > performance tests across it.
> >
> > Of course, if Ken does his testing with just mainline+smpnice then any
> > coupling becomes less of a problem. But I would like to see some feedback
> > from the other sched developers first.
>
> Personally, I'd rather see PlugSched merged in and this patch be used to
> create a new scheduler inside PlugSched. But I'm biased :-)
>
> As I see it, the problem that this patch is addressing is caused by the
> fact that the current scheduler is overly complicated. This patch just
> makes it more complicated.

What's complicated about the scheduler? I see simple/elegant when I
look in there. Interaction with the user is complex, but interactive
feel is a nebulous thing not restricted to this scheduler.

I really don't think this patch adds complexity, quite the opposite
actually. It just does a small bit of tweaking to the scheduler's weak
spot, and adds a dirt simple barrier against starvation. IMO, this
scheduler is not only quite simple, it's one weakness is generally
wonderful for throughput. It's just that it's sometimes a bit _too_
wonderful ;-)

-Mike