[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Is it bad to have lots of sleeping tasks?
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 01:13:04PM -0700, Hua Zhong wrote:
> > Linus scheduler is pretty dire beyond about 8 runnable threads, but very
> > good below that. It also has a refresh loop that is O(n) tasks, which is
> > strange, and actually looks easily to eliminate.
> So why not do it? Or implement a nicer scheduler? There are many good
> ones. There are o(1) schedulers that provide much better proportional
> sharing. They scale and also perform well even in "few running processes"
> case. They are also not hard to implement (I once implemented such a
> scheduler with 100 lines of patch, and that fitted in the existing Linux
> runqueue framework). What's the resistence to scheduler changes?

Expect Larry to jump on you.

Kurt Garloff <> Eindhoven, NL
GPG key: See mail header, key servers Linux kernel development
SuSE GmbH, Nuernberg, DE SCSI, Security
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:58    [W:0.042 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site