Re: [POC][RFC][PATCH] sched: Extended Scheduler Time Slice

[Steven Rostedt]

On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:53:38 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I don't have an informed opinion on whether the proposed heuristic is a 
> good idea or not, but it should definitely be implemented as an 

If you want to get an informed opinion, you can start here:  ;-)

  Thomas's first reply that had me think about this solution:

    https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87cyyfxd4k.ffs@tglx/

  My reply that started it:

    https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231024103426.4074d319@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

> extension to rseq as suggested by Peter. I've even made the whole rseq 
> ABI extensible to accommodate those additional use-cases.
> 
> In the initial rounds of rseq implementation, I even called rseq "kTLS" 
> because I expected it to be extended and eventually become an ABI that 
> contains various per-thread fields which are shared between kernel and 
> userspace.
> 
> So don't let the specific naming of the rseq system call stop you from 
> extending it for other purposes when per-thread shared memory between 
> kernel and userspace is needed. Setting up various per-thread areas like 
> this on thread creation is not free: it requires additional system calls 
> on thread creation. It really makes no sense to have more than one.

Thanks for the feedback Mathieu. This may indeed be the interface I am
looking for.

-- Steve