Re: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel

[James H. Anderson]

Raistlin wrote:
> Also, I'm not sure I can find in the FMLP paper information about the
> possibility of a task to suspend itself (e.g., I/O completion) while
> holding a short lock... I assume this is not recommended, but may be
> wrong, and, in that case, I hope Prof. Anderson and Bjorn will excuse
> and correct me. :-)
>
>   
This is a really excellent point and something I probably should have 
mentioned.  We developed the FMLP strictly for real-time (only) 
workloads.  We were specifically looking at protecting memory-resident 
resources (not I/O).  The FMLP would have to be significantly extended 
to work in settings where these assumptions don't hold.

Thanks for pointing this out.

-Jim
--
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/