Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 09 Jul 2004 09:32:16 +1000 | From | Peter Williams <> | Subject | Re: Maximum frequency of re-scheduling (minimum time quantum ) que stio n |
| |
Povolotsky, Alexander wrote: > Hi Peter, > > >>By freeing "time slice"s from their involvement in active/expired >>priority array switching etc., the various single priority array >>schedulers (e.g. Con Kolivas's staircase scheduler and my SPA "pb" and >>"eb" schedulers) that are under development raise the possibility of >>allowing the time slice for SCHED_RR tasks to be different to that of >>ordinary tasks or even for it to be set separately for each SCHED_RR >>task. Whether this is desirable or not is another question. > > > IMHO (I am new in Linux),- if this functionality could be either optionally > configured at compile time or be optionally invokable at run time (or > combination of both) - why not to have it ? - this addition enhances choices > of scheduling, > which is good. > > Is there a chance such functionality will make into Linux 2.6 as a patch (at > some later time) ?
Not until the current scheduler is replaced with a single priority array scheduler. However, if there's enough interest, I could add this functionality to the CPU scheduler evaluation patch so that people could experiment with it (BUT it would be at the bottom of my to do list).
> > By the way - what is the "mechanism" of decision making process (among Linux > kernel developers) on such things ?
I'll leave this question to someone more knowledgeable.
Pete -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce
- 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/
| |