lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] plugsched-2.0 patches ...
    From
    Date
    On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:14:48 EST, "Marc E. Fiuczynski" said:
    > Peter, thank you for maintaining Con's plugsched code in light of Linus' and
    > Ingo's prior objections to this idea. On the one hand, I partially agree
    > with Linus&Ingo's prior views that when there is only one scheduler that the
    > rest of the world + dog will focus on making it better. On the other hand,
    > having a clean framework that lets developers in a clean way plug in new
    > schedulers is quite useful.
    >
    > Linus & Ingo, it would be good to have an indepth discussion on this topic.
    > I'd argue that the Linux kernel NEEDS a clean pluggable scheduling
    > framework.

    Is this something that would benefit from several trips around the -mm series?

    ISTR that we started with one disk elevator, and now we have 3 or 4 that are
    selectable on the fly after some banging around in -mm. (And yes, I realize that
    the only reason we can change the elevator on the fly is because it can switch
    from the current to the 'stupid FIFO none' elevator and thence to the new one,
    which wouldn't really work for the CPU scheduler....)

    All the arguments that support having more than one elevator apply equally
    well to the CPU scheduler....
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:3.912 / U:0.388 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site