Re: Plumbers: Tweaking scheduler policy micro-conf RFP

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Mon May 14 2012 - 20:54:01 EST

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 06:16:21PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> This is a request-for-participation in a micro conference during the
> next Linux Plumber Conference (29-31st Aug).
> It'll require critical mass measured in talk submissions in the
> general area of scheduler and task management.

Hello, Vincent,

I still cannot claim any particular scheduler expertise, but would be
happy to act as moderator, if you would like.

Thanx, Paul

> If you're working on improving the the scheduler policy used to place
> a task on a CPU to suit your HW, we are inviting your participation
> and request you to submit a proposal to present your problem (e.g.
> power-efficiency) or a solution to solve said problem that should be
> considered by upstream developers.
> We've interacted with the people in To: list before in our quest to
> better understand how the scheduler works and we're hoping you all
> will consider participating in the micro-conf to help guide what kinds
> of ideas are likely to make it upstream.
> If you have ongoing work or ideas in the the following areas we're
> especially interested in hearing from you:
> 1. Consolidation of statistics with other frameworks (cpuidle,
> cpufreq, scheduler all seem to track their own statistics related to
> load, idleness, etc. Can this be converted to a library that is
> useable by all?)
> 2. Replacement for task consolidation on fewer CPUs aka. replacement
> for sched_mc
> 3. Improvement in the placement of activity beside tasks: timer,
> workqueue, IO, interruption
> 4. Instrumentation to calculate the compute capacity available on
> active cores and its utilization by a given workload
> We are thinking of organising the micro-conf as a Q & A session where
> a participant would state a problem and then there would be
> brainstorming on if this is indeed a problem and is so, how to achieve
> a solution. In other words, 20-30 minute slots of each Q & A
> 1. Problem statements with specific examples on why changing the
> default scheduler policy is desired
> 2. For each problem, if it is deemed not possible to accomplish easily
> today, brainstorming on what an acceptable solution would look like
> (frameworks to build upon, interfaces to use, related work in the
> area, key people to involve, etc.)
> Please email us if you will be attending the conference and interested
> in talking about this problem space.
> Regards,
> Amit & Vincent

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at