Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4 v0.3] sched/umcg: RFC: implement UMCG syscalls | From | Thierry Delisle <> | Date | Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:13:05 -0400 |
| |
> 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?
| |