lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [SHED] Questions.


Ian Kumlien wrote:

>On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 12:17, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>Search for "Nick's scheduler policy" ;)
>>
>
>Heh, yeah, i have been following your and con's work via
>marc.theaimsgroup.com. =)
>

Well, my patch does almost exactly what you describe.

>
>But wouldn't ingos off the shelf stuff work better with the quantum
>values like that?
>

That means more complexity and behaviour that is more difficult
to trace. The interactivity stuff is already a monster to tune.

>
>And is the preempt min quantum in there?
>

No. If you do that, you'll either break the priority concept very
badly, or you'll break it a little bit and turn the scheduler into
an O(n) one.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [W:0.048 / U:0.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site