[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel
    Raistlin wrote:

    > Remember that all my points are concerned with budgets, i.e., a scenario
    > where you have some mean to limit the capability of a task to ask for
    > CPU time over some kind of period.
    > And here it is where the problem comes since running C instead of having
    > A busy waiting means:
    > - that A is actually blocked, as said before;

    Why does it make any difference that A is blocked rather than busy
    waiting? In either case A cannot make forward progress.

    > - that A's budget is not diminished.

    If we're running B with A's priority, presumably it will get some amount
    of cpu time above and beyond what it would normally have gotten during a
    particular scheduling interval. Perhaps it would make sense to charge B
    what it would normally have gotten, and charge the excess amount to A?


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-07-14 20:27    [W:0.021 / U:20.548 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site