Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:58:28 -0700
From:      Jon Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
Cc:        bmah@FreeBSD.ORG, Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Scheduler patch, ready for commit.
Message-ID:  <20021010165828.GA82783@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20021010051241.700B22A88D@canning.wemm.org>
References:  <200210100446.g9A4k6kx026651@intruder.bmah.org> <20021010051241.700B22A88D@canning.wemm.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm [peter@wemm.org] wrote :

> "Bruce A. Mah" wrote:
> 
> > Let me just briefly don my RE team member hat and say that for right
> > now, I'm much more interested in seeing commits to make CURRENT more
> > stable, rather than seeing people add lots of new functionality.
> > Remember that we're targeting a release in less than two months.  It's
> > not going to be possible to make CURRENT perfect by then, but we need to
> > avoid making this process more complicated by adding loads of new
> > features, especially in the area of something as fundamental as the
> > scheduler.
> 
> To answer your concerns.. What Jeff is doing is trying to neatly
> encapsulate the existing scheduler into one place with a well defined
> interface and hooks to the rest of the kernel.  As long as this is done
> right, it is a NOP change.. but with an important difference.  It then
> allows optional drop-in replacements to be worked on independently.
> 
> I personally think it is worth it since the potential gains are so great -
> as long as as this step is done carefully and doesn't change the existing
> policy and strategies.  And that just happens to be what Jeff is trying to
> do.

FWIW, I agree. We should push this into 5.0-R. There are no real
functional changes, just an abstration. This abstraction will help us
along the lifetime of 5.0-R noticably, because a fair amount of scheduler
tweaking is going to have to happen within the next 5.x-R timeline to
adjust our scheduling methods so that KSE processes schedule well. This
type of work will benifit well from Jeff's changes. As he said, it's not
perfect, but it is a strong step in the right direction.

-- 
Jonathan Mini <mini@freebsd.org>
http://www.freebsd.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021010165828.GA82783>