[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070417230754.GR2986@holomorphy.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:07:54 -0700
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To: "Michael K. Edwards" <medwards.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>,
Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:00:53PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> Works, that is, right up until you add nonlinear interactions with CPU
> speed scaling. From my perspective as an embedded platform
> integrator, clock/voltage scaling is the elephant in the scheduler's
> living room. Patch in DPM (now OpPoint?) to scale the clock based on
> what task is being scheduled, and suddenly the dynamic priority
> calculations go wild. Nip this in the bud by putting an RT priority
> on the relevant threads (which you have to do anyway if you need
> remotely audio-grade latency), and the lock affinity heuristics break,
> so you have to hand-tune all the thread priorities. Blecch.
[...not terribly enlightening stuff trimmed...]
The ongoing scheduler work is on a much more basic level than these
affairs I'm guessing you googled. When the basics work as intended it
will be possible to move on to more advanced issues.
-- wli
-
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