Re: Scheduling times revisited

Rik van Riel (H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl)
Mon, 28 Sep 1998 12:01:30 +0200 (CEST)

On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Paul Barton-Davis wrote:
> Victor Yodaiken (hi Victor, its been a while since talk.politics.theory)
> writes:
>
> > That is, you should be able to show that for Application X, wall
> > clock time of T involves T_s time searching the queue where T_s is a
> > substantial fraction of T.
>
> Not quite. Thats true if you're interested in throughput. If you care
> about latency then the the test is something quite different: you only
> need show that T_s is comparable to or exceeds your desired latency.

desired latency == 0 :)

Then we should be able to get Victor's permission to
shorten the code paths in the scheduler.

Right now, we have an overly long code path because
each action done checks for RT-ness of the task at
hand ('harmless' actions are performed regardless).

If we separate the code paths, things should become
a lot cleaner and faster.

Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/