Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 2 Mar 1999 00:40:07 +0100 (CET) | | From | Rik van Riel <> | | Subject | Re: 2.2.2: 2 thumbs up from lm |
| |
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> the (obvious i think) cost is in the indirection of the > 'outsourced' runqueue (well, scheduling) part of task_struct.
So a better solution would be to somewhat 'split' the counter and task priority concepts, do the task recalculation only once each eternity (say 3 times a second) and reschedule with more static priorities, less often and returning to the same CPU eater after your editor has released the CPU.
I'll be looking into some schedulers RSN and design something fun for Linux...
Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control over your own data. +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Linux Memory Management site: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/ | | Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
- 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/
|  |