> >Now, if I understand you well enough David, you'd like an
> >algorithm where the less you want the CPU, the more you get
> >it.
>
> Exactly. This is the UNIX tradition of static and dynamic priorities. The
> more polite you are about yielding the CPU when you don't need it, the more
> claim you have to getting it when you do need it.
>
> >I'd love if you could actually give us an outlook of
> >your ideal scheduler so I can try my thought experiment on it,
> >because from what I've understood so far, your hypothetical
> >scheduler would allocate all of the CPU to the yielders.
>
> Not all, just the same share any other process gets. They're all
> ready-to-run, they're all at the same priority.
Correct my logic, please:
1. Rule: The less you want the CPU, the more you get it.
2. A yielder process never wants the CPU
3. As a result of Rule 1, it always gets it.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 23 2002 - 22:00:17 EST