[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1225388883.7803.217.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 18:48:03 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: faggioli@...dalf.sssup.it
Cc: henrik@...tad.us, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
fabio@...dalf.sssup.it,
Michael Trimarchi <trimarchimichael@...oo.it>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"gregory.haskins" <gregory.haskins@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Deadline scheduling (was: Re: Rearranging layout of code in
the scheduler)
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 18:17 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Personally I'd like to see the full priority inversion issue solved by
> something like the proxy execution protocol, however the SMP extension
> thereof seems to be a tad expensive - found a book on graph theory, all
> that remains is finding time to read it :-)
>
> The advantage of proxy execution is that its fully invariant to the
> schedule function and thus even works for proportional fair schedulers
> and any kind of scheduler hierarchy.
Basically the problem that I'm looking at is:
Given a directed acyclic graph G, with entry nodes E (those who don't
have an inbound edge) and exit nodes X (those without an outbound edge)
then given an exit node x of X, split the graph into G1 and G2 so that
G1 contains x and all paths leading to it.
--
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