lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: massive_intr on CFS, BFS, and EDF
From
Date
On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 00:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 15:31 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> > Do you allow oversubscription with EDF? It would seem so based on these
> > results. Would it maybe make sense to disallow oversubscription, or
> > make it an option?
>
> afaiu he doesn't,
yeaah, as explained in the previous mail, this is in place only if group
scheduling is on since now, but I'll add these bits to non-group
solution, aalready planned that. :-)

> he simply splits the task's wcet between parent and
> child and (intends?) to feed back on child exit.
>
yes again, that's what the submitted patch does, which is an arbitrary
choice among all the non-optimal solutions I'm able to think of, as
explained in the first e-mail! :-(

Now, I'm going to give your suggestion of assigning children 0 bandwidth
a shot, and ask the parent (they can't they have no bandwidth!) to give
them some runtime/deadline to make them run.
This also has some issues, I think, but looks more natural... At least
does not affect parent's bandwidth, possibly reducing it to (almost)
0!! :-(

Regards,
Dario

--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)

http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@ekiga.net /
dario.faggioli@jabber.org
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-26 08:59    [W:0.046 / U:4.784 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site