Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:08:49 -0500 | From | Timothy Miller <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] O(1) Entitlement Based Scheduler |
| |
Peter Williams wrote: > Timothy Miller wrote: > > <snip> > >> In fact, that may be the only "flaw" in your design. It sounds like >> your scheduler does an excellent job at fairness with very low >> overhead. The only problem with it is that it doesn't determine >> priority dynamically. > > > This (i.e. automatic renicing of specified programs) is a good idea but > is not really a function that should be undertaken by the scheduler > itself. Two possible solutions spring to mind: > > 1. modify the do_execve() in fs/exec.c to renice tasks when they execute > specified binaries
We don't want user-space programs to have control over priority. This is DoS waiting to happen.
> 2. have a user space daemon poll running tasks periodically and renice > them if they are running specified binaries
This is much too specific. Again, if the USER has control over this list, then it's potential DoS. And if the user adds a program which should qualify but which is not in the list, the program will not get its deserved boost.
And a sysadmin is not going to want to update 200 lab computers just so one user can get their program to run properly.
> > Both of these solutions have their advantages and disadvantages, are > (obviously) complicated than I've made them sound and would require a > great deal of care to be taken during their implementation. However, I > think that they are both doable. My personal preference would be for > the in kernel solution on the grounds of efficiency.
They are doable, but they are not a general solution.
- 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/
| |