Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:46:39 -0400 (EDT) | From | "James H. Anderson" <> | Subject | Re: [Fwd: Re: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel] |
| |
> It looks to me like Jim and Bjoern name the kernel-mutex locking scheme > (of non-preemption and FIFO queueing) as FMLP and advocate it for > user-level mutexes. Jim: Please correct me if my interpretation is > incorrect.
I should have addressed this, sorry.
Actually, I don't advocate for anything. :-) As I said in my very first email in this thread, in the LTIMUS^RT project, changing Linux is not one of our goals. I leave that to other people who are way smarter than me.
But to the point you raise, please note that the long version of the FMLP is a little more than combining non-preemption with FIFO waiting since waiting is via suspension. And as I said in an earlier email, we designed it for a real-time (only) environment. However, I think a user-level variant that could be used in a more general environment would certainly be possible.
-Jim
P.S. We didn't talk about the low processor utlization (Dhall effect) mentioned in your last email. However, that applies to hard real-time workloads, not soft real-time workloads. This discussion has been touching on both.
| |