Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:57:04 +0100 | From | Tommaso Cucinotta <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 02/22] sched: add extended scheduling interface |
| |
Il 10/11/2010 23:17, Raistlin ha scritto: >> I would suggest we add at least one more field so we can implement the >> stochastic model from UNC, sched_runtime_dev or sched_runtime_var or >> somesuch. > Do we need some further mechanism to grant its > extendability? > Padding? > Versioning? > void *data field? > Whatever? This is a key point. Let me copy text from a slide of my LPC main-conf talk:
Warning: features & parameters may easily grow - Addition of parameters, such as - deadline - desired vs guaranteed runtime (for adaptive reservations & controlled overcommitment) - Set of flags for controlling variations on behavior - work conserving vs non-conserving reservations - what happens at fork() time - what happens on tasks death (automatic reclamation) - notifications from kernel (e.g., runtime exhaustion) - Controlled access to RT scheduling by unprivileged applications (e.g., per-user “quotas”) - Monitoring (e.g., residual runtime, available bandwidth) - Integration/interaction with power management (e.g., spec of per-cpu-frequency budget)
How can we guarantee extensibility (or replacement) of parameters in the future ?
What about something like _attr_*() in POSIX-like interfaces ?
T.
-- Tommaso Cucinotta, Computer Engineering PhD, Researcher ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy Tel +39 050 882 024, Fax +39 050 882 003 http://retis.sssup.it/people/tommaso
-- 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/
| |