Re: [PATCH][plugsched 0/28] Pluggable cpu scheduler framework

[Matthias Urlichs]

Hi, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> I believe that by compartmenting in the wrong way [*] we kill the
> natural integration effects. We'd end up with 5 (or 20) bad generic
> schedulers that happen to work in one precise workload only, but there
> would not be enough push to build one good generic scheduler, because
> the people who are now forced to care about the Linux scheduler would be
> content about their specialized schedulers.

I don't think so. There are multiple attempts to build a better
generic scheduler (Con's for one), so there's your counterexample right
here. However, testing a different scheduler currently requires a kernel
recompile and a reboot.

I hate that. Ideally, the scheduler would be hotpluggable... but I can
live with a reboot. I don't think a kernel recompile to switch schedulers
makes sense, though, so I for one am likely not to bother. So far.

You can't actually develop a better scheduler if people need to go too
far out of their way to compare them.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs   |   {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de   |  smurf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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