| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAJd=RBAN3KDauKw1Qy9MNXAZnkbewe5AtWOPif6aYH2CbOc3Tg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 12:47:51 +0800 From: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com> To: Matthias Kohler <matthias.kohler2224@...il.com> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel@...ivas.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Multiple run-queues for BFS On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Matthias Kohler <matthias.kohler2224@...il.com> wrote: > I'm doing a CPU-Scheduler based on BFS by Con Kolivas with support for > multiple run-queues. BFS in itself uses only one run-queue for all > CPU's. This avoids the load-balancing overhead, but does not scale well. > One run-queue per CPU does scale well, but then the scheduler has > load-balancing overhead. The scheduler I'm developing supports every > possible run-queues configuration. You can have one single run-queue > like in BFS, or you can have one run-queue per CPU, or something > completely different like one run-queue every two CPU's. This, in theory > would allow the scheduler to be fine-tuned to the hardware and the > workload. Cannot see the reason to install wings on horse back. Is it developed to schedule apps on advanced servers? Notebook, or smart phone? Good Weekend Hillf -- 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