[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070423210341.GA7675@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:03:41 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@....jussieu.fr>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, caglar@...dus.org.tr,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> sorry, i was a bit imprecise here. There is a case where CFS can give
> out a 'loan' to tasks. The scheduler tick has a low resolution, so it
> is fundamentally inevitable [*] that tasks will run a bit more than
> they should, and at a heavy context-switching rates these errors can
> add up significantly. Furthermore, we want to batch up workloads.
>
> So CFS has a "no loans larger than sched_granularity_ns" policy (which
> defaults to 5msec), and it captures these sub-granularity 'loans' with
> nanosec accounting. This too is a very sane economic policy and is
> anti-infationary :-)
at which point i guess i should rename CFS to 'EFS' (the Economic Fair
Scheduler)? =B-)
Ingo
-
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