lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Linux scheduler, overscheduling performance, threads

    This discussion is rapidly degenerating into a "does too!" "does not!"
    match. So let me turn the question around. Assume, for a moment, that a
    patch for Linux existed which did two things:
    1) Ran signifigantly faster for large run queues- for example it switched
    from the current O(n) algorithm to an O(log n) algorithm.
    2) Ran slower than the current scheduling algorithm for short run
    queues.
    And the patch had no other effects on the kernel at large and was
    otherwise well written, etc.

    Am I right in assuming that wether the patch would be accepted would
    depend upon how much slower it made the common case? Obviously, if it
    made the common case no slower, no one would mind putting it in the
    kernel. On the other hand, if it made the common case a million times
    slower, there is no way it'd ever get into the kernel, and rightfully so.
    Where (roughly) inbetween is the breakpoint?

    Brian



    -
    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 13:56    [W:3.755 / U:0.228 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site