lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Implementing temporal affinity
    Date
    From: "Chris Swiedler" <ceswiedler@mindspring.com>
    > > Let's say the minimum time is 50 cycles:
    > >
    > > Process A last_cpu = 1
    > > Process B last_cpu = 1
    > > Process C last_cpu = 1
    > >
    > > Process C runs for 200 cycles on CPU 1
    > > Process C last_cpu = 1
    > > Process A runs for 300 cycles on CPU 2
    > > Process A last_cpu = 2
    > >
    > > Process C is running on CPU 1
    > > Process C last_cpu = 1
    > > Process B runs for 15 cycles on CPU 2 but is interrupted
    > > Process B last_cpu = 1 (unaltered)
    > >
    > > Here we have:
    > > Process A last_cpu = 2
    > > Process B last_cpu = 1
    > > Process C last_cpu = 1
    > > C is currenty running on 1
    > > Scheduler needs to pick a process for 2
    > > A runs on 2
    > >
    > > C is starved
    >
    > ??? I don't see how C is starved. C and B have an equal chance of being
    > scheduled for CPU 1 (barring other factors). Certainly, C won't be starved
    > in an extreme sense, because we're only adjusting the goodness(), and so
    > eventually it will be scheduled again.

    Sorry, typo. B is starved. C is already running on 1
    and has 185 cycles left.

    Also, I meant starved in that even though B is the
    process time-affinity scheduling should choose, it
    won't get chosen.

    ..Stu


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

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.024 / U:117.780 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site