lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans