lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: a quest for a better scheduler
    Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:03:10AM -0400, Hubertus Franke wrote:
    > > I understand the dilemma that the Linux scheduler is in, namely satisfy
    > > the low end at all cost. [..]
    >
    > We can satisfy the low end by making the numa scheduler at compile time (that's
    > what I did in my patch at least).
    >
    > Andrea

    I fully agree with this approach. It would be very hard to design a
    scheduler that performs equally well on a UP machine running couple of
    processes and a NUMA machine. These two cases represent the two ends of
    spectrum. The two schedulers should be separate IMO and one of them
    should be selected at compile time.

    --
    Khalid

    ====================================================================
    Khalid Aziz Linux Development Laboratory
    (970)898-9214 Hewlett-Packard
    khalid@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, CO
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:23    [W:0.024 / U:63.632 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site