lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 4/4 v0.3] sched/umcg: RFC: implement UMCG syscalls
From
Date
 > Latency/efficiency: on worker wakeup an idle server can be picked from
> the list and context-switched into synchronously, on the same CPU.
> Using FDs and select/poll/epoll will add extra layers of abstractions;
> synchronous context-switches (not yet fully implemented in UMCG) will
> most likely be impossible. This patchset seems much more efficient and
> lightweight than whatever can be built on top of FDs.

I can believe that.

Are you planning to support separate scheduling instances within a
single user
space? That is having multiple sets of server threads and workers can
only run
within a specific set.

I believe the problem with the idle_servers_ptr as specified is that it
is not
possible to reclaim used nodes safely. I don't see any indication of which
nodes the kernel can concurrently access and on which some memory
reclamation
scheme could be based.

What is the benefit of having users maintain themselves a list of idle
servers
rather than each servers marking themselves as 'out of work' and having the
kernel maintain the list?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-19 20:41    [W:0.063 / U:0.460 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site