Re: [RFC] CPU scheduler: Simplified interactive bonus mechanism

[Nick Piggin]

Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 05:24 pm, Peter Williams wrote:
>
> > This patch implements a prototype version of a simplified interactive
> > bonus mechanism.  The mechanism does not attempt to identify interactive
>
>
> > ---
> >
> > Your comments on this proposal are requested.
> >
> > ---
>
>
> If we're going to redo the interactivity estimator I happen to have a whole 
> cpu scheduler design that is interactive by design without being a state 
> machine that I've been hacking / maintining / debugging for 2 years that many 
> people are already using in production...

What do you mean interactive by design (presumably as opposed
to the current scheduler which is not interactive by design)?

And what do you mean by not being a state machine?

Back on topic: I don't think that this patch isn't clearly
better than what currently exists, nor would require less
testing than any other large scale changes to the scheduler
behaviour.

So, as Con seems to imply, it is JASW (just another scheduler
rewrite). Not that there's anything wrong with that... except
it is not really a good fix for a problem with the current
scheduler.

Thanks,
Nick

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/