linux-kernel - Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8

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]

Message-ID: <20070502053002.GT31925@holomorphy.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 May 2007 22:30:02 -0700
From:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
To:	Ting Yang <tingy@...umass.edu>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v8

On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:57:14PM -0400, Ting Yang wrote:
>  Authors of this paper proposed a scheduler: Earlist Eligible Virtual 
> Deadline First (EEVDF). EEVDF uses exactly the same method as CFS to 
> track the execution of each running task. The only difference between 
> EEVDF and CFS is that EEVDF tries to _deadline_ fair while CFS is 
> _start-time_ fair. Scheduling based on deadline gives better reponse 
> time bound and seems to more fair.
>  In the following part of this email, I will try to explain the 
> similarities and differences between EEVDF and CFS. Hopefully, this 
> might provide you with some useful information w.r.t your current work 
> on CFS.

Any chance you could write a patch to convert CFS to EEVDF? People may
have an easier time understanding code than theoretical explanations.
(I guess I could do it if sufficiently pressed.)


-- 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/