On 3/12/07, michael chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Considering the concepts put out by projects such as BOINC and [EMAIL PROTECTED], I wouldn't be thoroughly surprised by this ideology, although I do question the particular way this test case is being run.
If Con actually implements SCHED_IDLEPRIO in RSDL, life is good even in that case.
This seems to me like he's saying that there has to be a mechanism (outside of nice) that can be used to treat processes that "I" want to be interactive all special-like. It feels like something that would have been said in the design of what the scheduler was in -ck and is currently in vanilla.
Exactly. Driving us again toward the fact that different workloads might benefit from different schedulers (eg: RSDL is cool for server loads, previous staircase did an excellent job on desktop, etc) and thus that having a choice of schedulers might be something that would satisfy (some) people...
To me, that fundamentally clashes with the design behind RSDL. That said, I could be wrong -- Con appears to have something that could be very promising up his sleeve that could come out sooner or later. Once he's written it, of course. In any case, RSDL seems very promising, for the most part.
It certainly is. "Negative" feedback can be a good thing too, as it helps improving it anyway. It's nonetheless true that it's practically impossible to satisfy 100% of use case with a single design, so choices will have to be made. HTH T-Bone -- Thibaut VARENE http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
