Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 04 Apr 2001 09:49:12 -0600 | From | Khalid Aziz <> | Subject | Re: a quest for a better scheduler |
| |
Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:03:10AM -0400, Hubertus Franke wrote: > > I understand the dilemma that the Linux scheduler is in, namely satisfy > > the low end at all cost. [..] > > We can satisfy the low end by making the numa scheduler at compile time (that's > what I did in my patch at least). > > Andrea
I fully agree with this approach. It would be very hard to design a scheduler that performs equally well on a UP machine running couple of processes and a NUMA machine. These two cases represent the two ends of spectrum. The two schedulers should be separate IMO and one of them should be selected at compile time.
-- Khalid
==================================================================== Khalid Aziz Linux Development Laboratory (970)898-9214 Hewlett-Packard khalid@fc.hp.com Fort Collins, CO - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |