lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] plugsched-2.0 patches ...
Date
Paraphrasing Jens Axboe:
> I don't think you can compare [plugsched with the plugio framework].
> Yes they are both schedulers, but that's about where the 'similarity'
> stops. The CPU scheduler must be really fast, overhead must be kept
> to a minimum. For a disk scheduler, we can affort to burn cpu cycles
> to increase the io performance. The extra abstraction required to
> fully modularize the cpu scheduler would come at a non-zero cost as
> well, but I bet it would have a larger impact there. I doubt you
> could measure the difference in the disk scheduler.

Modularization usually is done through a level of indirection (function
pointers). I have a can of "indirection be gone" almost ready to spray over
the plugsched framework that would reduce the overhead to zero at runtime.
I'd be happy to finish that work if it makes it more palpable to integrate a
plugsched framework into the kernel?

Marc

-
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 14:09    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site