![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:56:20AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > The rt-overload mechanism is distinct from load balancing. RT overload > > attempts to make sure the NR_CPUS highest priority runnable tasks are running > > on each of the available CPUs. This isn't load balancing, this is "system > > wide strict realtime priority scheduling" (SWSRPS). This scheduling should > > take place even if there are 1000 non RT tasks on CPU 0 and none on all the > > others. The load balancer would be responsible for distributing those 1000 > > non rt tasks to all the CPUs. > > I'm quite aware of what you're saying as well as a much of the > contents of the -rt patch. Please don't assume that I'm not aware of > this. The -rt patch doesn't do SWSRPS, [...] to the contrary, the "RT overload" code in the -rt tree does strict, system-wide RT priority scheduling. That's the whole point of it. Ingo - 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: 2006-04-08 07:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||