| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:51:02 +1000 From: Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au> To: Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2 Al Boldi wrote: > Peter Williams wrote: >> Al Boldi wrote: >>> Peter Williams wrote: >>>> Al Boldi wrote: [bits deleted] >>>>> It may be really great, to allow schedulers perPid parent, thus >>>>> allowing the stacking of different scheduler semantics. This could >>>>> aid flexibility a lot. >>>> I'm don't understand what you mean here. Could you elaborate? >>> i.e: Boot the kernel with spa_no_frills, then start X with spa_ws. >> It's probably not a good idea to have different schedulers managing the >> same resource. The way to do different scheduling per process is to use >> the scheduling policy mechanism i.e. SCHED_FIFO, SCHED_RR, etc. >> (possibly extended) within each scheduler. On the other hand, on an SMP >> system, having a different scheduler on each run queue (or sub set of >> queues) might be interesting :-). > > What's wrong with multiple run-queues on UP? A really high likelihood of starvation of some tasks. Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@...pond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists