Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:36:25 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy |
| |
Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>>Hi, >>Patch against 2.6.0-test4. It fixes a lot of problems here vs >>previous versions. There aren't really any open issues for me, so >>testers would be welcome. >> >> >... > >>On the other hand, I expect the best cases and maybe most usual cases would >>be better on Con's... and Con might have since done some work in the latency >>area. >> > >Has anyone developed a (run-time) scheduler [policy] selector, via >sysctl or sysfs, so that different kernel builds aren't required? > >I know that I have heard discussions of this previously. >
Not that I know of. This would probably require an extra layer of indirection in the standard form of Linux's struct of pointers to functions, with your standard schedule functions as wrappers. I think it would be highly unlikely that this would get into a standard kernel, but might make a nice testing tool...
In fact this might end up being incompatible with architectures like SPARC... but I'm sure someone could make it work if they really wanted to.
I think the present boot-time selector (selecting different kernels at boot) will have to suffice for now :P
- 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/
| |