lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel
    Raistlin wrote:

    > Very basically: from the analysis point of view one easy and effective
    > solution would be to have the blocked-running tasks --i.e., the tasks
    > blocked on some lock that have been left on the rq to proxy-execute the
    > lock owner-- busy waiting while the lock owner is running. This allows
    > for retaining a lot of nice properties BWI already has, as far as
    > analyzability is concerned.
    >
    > On the other hand, from the practical end efficiency point of view, it
    > would be not that difficult to block these otherwise-spinning tasks, in
    > order to avoid wasting CPU time too much... The only important thing is
    > to properly account the budget of the correct server/group (which
    > probably must be the otherwise-spinning task's one), or the analysis is
    > gone again! :-O

    Could you elaborate on this "proper accounting"?

    If task A is blocked waiting for a lock (held by a task B on another
    cpu) and we run task C instead, how would you propose that the
    accounting be handled?

    Chris


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-07-13 18:35    [W:4.395 / U:0.368 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site