[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: massive_intr on CFS, BFS, and EDF
    On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 15:31 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
    > On 09/25/2009 10:07 AM, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
    > > It is important to note that
    > > the expected behavior of an edf scheduler is *not* a fair one. It has to
    > > do its best to guarantee the deadlines of the admitted tasks.
    > Do you allow oversubscription with EDF? It would seem so based on these
    > results. Would it maybe make sense to disallow oversubscription, or
    > make it an option?

    afaiu he doesn't, he simply splits the task's wcet between parent and
    child and (intends?) to feed back on child exit.

    > If you have massive oversubscription with EDF, what is the design
    > intent? Do you try to meet the goals on as many tasks as possible,
    > while the oversubscribed tasks get nothing?

    oversubscribing edf isn't in general recommended, iirc u>1 gives
    unbounded latencies with edf.

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-09-26 00:41    [W:0.019 / U:84.428 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site