Re: O(1) scheduler & interactivity improvements

Mike Galbraith (efault@gmx.de)
Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:18:56 +0200


At 01:39 PM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
>Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>At 10:18 AM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
>[...]
>
> > (simple? decode stack, find out where he was sleeping,
>Complicated indeed, but why do that?
>A process sleeping on a pipe will wake up in the kernel's
>pipe reading code, won't it? No need for guessing where
>it was sleeping. Code for transferring interactivity
>bonus could go right there.

<G> Suggestion: Re-read the part you snipped before you submit the patch.

>>What I think kills the priority redistribution idea is _massive_
>>complexity. I don't see anything simple. You would have to build the
>>logical connections between tasks, which currently doesn't exist.
>
>I must admit I don't know the details of the scheduler. Still, Linus
>tried a form of redistribution (the backboost thing). It helped in some
>cases.
>It seems to me that it got revoked because it did the wrong
>thing at times, leading to starvation issus that didn't exist before.
>It didn't go because it was overly complex or slow?

It went because it drove the system nuts sometimes. Too bad that, it was
lovely for GUI.

-Mike

-
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/