fairsched for o(1)-scheduler

• Next message: Paco Ros: "Re: Linux v2.6.0-test2"
• Previous message: Tugrul Galatali: "[PATCH] Remove what looks like a redundant ffb_options in ffb_drv.c"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Given I've got spare time now, I'm trying to revive and finally
have a working implementation for the 2.6 fairsched patch.

Since my early attempts crashed, I would appreciate peer review
and advise on how to do a first implementation.

I was told that printk should not be used inside the scheduler,
is this true?

Also, in order to park tasks aside, I created another prio_array
besides the active and expired ones, queuing expired tasks there
until the used could afford to move them to the active one. Does
the scheduler assume, in implicit form, that a task is either on
the active or expired array?

The proposed design is described at this page:

http://wind.cocodriloo.com/~wind/fairsched/

And also by Hubertus Franke on his OLS 2003 paper:

http://archive.linuxsymposium.org/ols2003/Proceedings/All-Reprints/Reprint-Franke-OLS2003.pdf

Greets, Antonio.

-- 
1. Dado un programa, siempre tiene al menos un fallo.
2. Dadas varias lineas de codigo, siempre se pueden acortar a menos lineas.
3. Por induccion, todos los programas se pueden
   reducir a una linea que no funciona.
-
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/

• Next message: Paco Ros: "Re: Linux v2.6.0-test2"
• Previous message: Tugrul Galatali: "[PATCH] Remove what looks like a redundant ffb_options in ffb_drv.c"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 22:00:33 EST