lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRE: Scheduling problem with 2.4?
    Date

    > I see what you mean, but I still don't think it is a problem. If
    > bandwidth matters you will have to use large writes and reads anyways,
    > if bandwidth doesn't matter the number of ctx switches doesn't matter
    > either and latency usually is way more important with small messages.

    > Andrea

    This is the danger of pre-emption based upon dynamic priorities. You can
    get cases where two processes each are permitted to make a very small amount
    of progress in alternation. This can happen just as well with large writes
    as small ones, the amount of data is irrelevent, it's the amount of CPU time
    that's important, or to put it another way, it's how far a process can get
    without suffering a context switch.

    I suggest that a process be permitted to use up at least some portion of
    its timeslice exempt from any pre-emption based solely on dynamic
    priorities.

    DS


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.020 / U:91.944 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site