linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:45:33 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc:	Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2

Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 21:27:14 +0300, Al Boldi said:
> > Peter Williams wrote:
> > > 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?
>
> On an SMP system, you can have one CPU doing one class of scheduling (long
> timeslice for computational, for example), while another CPU is dedicated
> to doing RT scheduling, and so on.  It's not clear to me that "different
> classes per CPU" makes any real sense on a UP....

Conceptually there should be no difference between UP and MP.

Think HyperThreading.


Thanks!

--
Al

-
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/