quick Scheduler design question

Joseph Pingenot (jap3003@ksu.edu)
Wed, 27 Mar 2002 14:43:16 -0600


I haven't poked at it much, but some of you might have a free minute to
answer a fairly simple scheduler question.

Does the scheduler merely select what process is going to run next, and
then pause the current process and run the new one? If so, would it be
beneficial to instead have the scheduler
a) run the task currently specified as being second-to-next
b) select the task which will be run second-to-next and, if necessary,
start to get whatever needs to be un-swapped [maybe make the
processes state TASK_NEXTUP or something, and have its pages
slowly swap in on timer or something]

It seems to me that, if it's not already being done, this would increase
complexity only a *little*, while making it *seem* faster, since the
next process would be swapping in while the current process uses up its
time. Naturally, this would cause problems if both processes can't fully
swap in together.

Ah well. Was just a thought on an idle afternoon that I thought those
with more knowledge might like to kick around. Mabye the lesson is
that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. ;)


"But a cat that is functionally a dog may have some utility; we make no
 comment whatsoever as to the appropriateness of that image when used with
 reference to certain companies' operating systems." Lettice, The Register
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/