Thread (74 messages) 74 messages, 16 authors, 2009-09-01

Re: RFC: THE OFFLINE SCHEDULER

From: Ingo Molnar <hidden>
Date: 2009-08-26 21:08:42
Also in: lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

* Christoph Lameter [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
to have sharp teeth nor any apparent poison fangs) - i simply 
concur with the reasons Peter listed that it is a technically 
inferior solution.
Ok so you are saying that the reduction of OS latencies will make 
the processor completely available and have no disturbances like 
OFFLINE scheduling?
I'm saying that your lack of trying to reduce even low-hanging-fruit 
latency sources that were pointed out to you fundamentally destroys 
your credibility in claiming that they are unfixable for all 
practical purposes.

Or, to come up with a car analogy: it's a bit as if at a repair shop 
you complained that your car has a scratch on its cooler grid that 
annoys you, and you insisted that it be outfitted with a new diesel 
engine which needs no cooler grid (throwing away the nice Hemi block 
it has currently) - and ignored the mechanic's opinion that he loves 
the Hemi and that to him the scratch looks very much like bird-sh*t 
and that a proper car wash might do the trick too ;-)
Peter has not given a solution to the problem. Nor have you.
What do you mean by 'has given a solution' - a patch?

Peter mentioned a few things that you can try to reduce the 
worst-case latency of the timer tick.

Peter also implemented the hr-tick solution (CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK) - 
it's mostly upstream but disabled because it had problems - if you 
are interested in improving this area you can fix and complete it.

That would benefit ordinary Linux users too, not just rare isolation 
apps.

	Ingo
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help