Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:18:56 +0200 | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Subject | Re: O(1) scheduler & interactivity improvements |
| |
At 01:39 PM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: >Mike Galbraith wrote: >>At 10:18 AM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: >[...] > > > (simple? decode stack, find out where he was sleeping, >Complicated indeed, but why do that? >A process sleeping on a pipe will wake up in the kernel's >pipe reading code, won't it? No need for guessing where >it was sleeping. Code for transferring interactivity >bonus could go right there.
<G> Suggestion: Re-read the part you snipped before you submit the patch.
>>What I think kills the priority redistribution idea is _massive_ >>complexity. I don't see anything simple. You would have to build the >>logical connections between tasks, which currently doesn't exist. > >I must admit I don't know the details of the scheduler. Still, Linus >tried a form of redistribution (the backboost thing). It helped in some >cases. >It seems to me that it got revoked because it did the wrong >thing at times, leading to starvation issus that didn't exist before. >It didn't go because it was overly complex or slow?
It went because it drove the system nuts sometimes. Too bad that, it was lovely for GUI.
-Mike
- 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/
| |