lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8
At some point in the past, Ting Yang wrote:
>> Based on my understanding, adopting something like EEVDF in CFS should
>> not be very difficult given their similarities, although I do not have
>> any idea on how this impacts the load balancing for SMP. Does this worth
>> a try?
>> Sorry for such a long email :-)

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:42:20AM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
> Thanks for the excellent explanation. I think EEVDF and many algs alike
> assume global ordering of all tasks in the system (based on virtual
> time), whereas CFS does so locally on each processor and relies on load
> balancing to achieve fairness across processors. It'd achieve strong
> fairness locally, but I'm not sure about its global fairness properties
> in an MP environment. If ideally the total load weight on each processor
> is always the same, then local fairness would imply global fairness, but
> this is a bin packing problem and is intractable ...

It's sort of obvious how to approximate it, but not entirely obvious
whether a given approximation actually suffices. More help with the
theoretical aspects is needed.


- wli
-
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: 2007-05-02 21:13    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans