Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.3.1 for 2.6.16-rc5

[Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>]

Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 April 2006 10:01, Peter Williams wrote:
>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 04 April 2006 09:04, Peter Williams wrote:
>>>> Al Boldi wrote:
>>>>> Also, different schedulers per cpu could be rather useful.
>>>>> Peter Williams wrote:
>>>> I think that would be dangerous.  However, different schedulers per
>>>> cpuset might make sense but it involve a fair bit of work.
>>> I'm curious. How do you think different schedulers per cpu would be
>>> useful?
>> I don't but I think they MIGHT make sense for cpusets e.g. one set with
>> a scheduler targeted at interactive tasks and another targeted at server
>> tasks.  NB the emphasis on might.
> 
> I am curious as to Al's answer since he asked for the feature.

OK.

> It would be 
> easy for me to modify the staircase cpu scheduler to allow the interactive 
> and compute modes be set on a per-cpu basis if that was desired.  For that to
> be helpful of course you'd have to manually set affinity for the tasks or 
> logins you wanted to run on each cpu(s).

Yes, I agree that it would not be a good idea for CPUs that are sharing 
(via load balancing) the same set of tasks to have different schedulers 
or policy which is why I suggested only doing it at the cpuset level.

Peter
-- 
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058@bigpond.net.au

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
  -- Ambrose Bierce