lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-11 00:59    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans