[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [ck] Re: is RSDL an "unfair" scheduler too?
    On 3/18/07, Mike Galbraith <> wrote:
    > On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 06:24 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
    > > Maybe we're all discussing the problem because we have reached the point
    > > where we need two types of schedulers : one for the desktop and one for
    > > the servers. After all, this is already what is proposed with preempt,
    > > it would make sense provided they share the same core and avoid ifdefs
    > > or unused structure members. Maybe adding OPTIONAL unfairness to RSDL
    > > would help some scenarios, but in any case it is important to retain
    > > the default fairness it provides.
    > Bingo.

    Sounds like Staircase's interactive mode switch, except this actually
    requires writing additional code.

    The per-user system would also be nice for servers, provided there are
    CPU/disc IO/swapper/... quotas or priorities at least.

    All in all, I'd hate to see mldonkey eating 1/3 of CPU time, just
    because it runs as another user.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-03-18 07:57    [W:0.021 / U:20.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site