lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [May]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subjectpriority recalculation
Hi,

I'm currently looking at a slightly changed scheduler
design where p->counter and the actual task priority
(which is mainly used for task latency anyway) are
separated and we can get rid of the large recalculation
of all processes' priorities alltogether.

I think this might be worthwhile because the large
recalculation holds the tasklist_lock for a _long_
time, blocking the other CPU's access to the runqueue.

If we smeared out this overhead by adding a new variable
to the task_struct and can simplify goodness() at the
same time, would that be worth it? -- especially when we
take SMP scalability into account...

cheers,

Rik -- Open Source: you deserve to be in control of your data.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Le Reseau netwerksystemen BV: http://www.reseau.nl/ |
| Linux Memory Management site: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/ |
| Nederlandse Linux documentatie: http://www.nl.linux.org/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.038 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site