lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy


    Randy.Dunlap wrote:

    >>Hi,
    >>Patch against 2.6.0-test4. It fixes a lot of problems here vs
    >>previous versions. There aren't really any open issues for me, so
    >>testers would be welcome.
    >>
    >>
    >...
    >
    >>On the other hand, I expect the best cases and maybe most usual cases would
    >>be better on Con's... and Con might have since done some work in the latency
    >>area.
    >>
    >
    >Has anyone developed a (run-time) scheduler [policy] selector, via
    >sysctl or sysfs, so that different kernel builds aren't required?
    >
    >I know that I have heard discussions of this previously.
    >

    Not that I know of. This would probably require an extra layer of
    indirection in the standard form of Linux's struct of pointers to
    functions, with your standard schedule functions as wrappers.
    I think it would be highly unlikely that this would get into a
    standard kernel, but might make a nice testing tool...

    In fact this might end up being incompatible with architectures
    like SPARC... but I'm sure someone could make it work if they really
    wanted to.

    I think the present boot-time selector (selecting different kernels
    at boot) will have to suffice for now :P


    -
    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 13:48    [W:0.022 / U:0.492 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site