lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Scheduler problems
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, MOLNAR Ingo wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
>
> > Ingo, any thoughts? Seems that if for any reason all wakeup interrupts
> > arrive at the same CPU which is running the SCHED_FIFO task, then we
> > will _never_ perform any successful wakeups without first exhausting the
> > other CPU's current timeslice.
>
> yes i have a patch for this but it's not straightforward enough
> for 2.2. (ie. a 50k patch) It has to do things like a full
> goodness() run for every CPU in wakeup(), which is less than
> ideal.

I am willing to improve/maintain that patch as an add-on
feature for 2.2 -- once 2.2 stabilizes, of course...

cheers,

Rik -- If a Microsoft product fails, who do you sue?
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. riel@nl.linux.org |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.nl.linux.org/~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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site