Re: Scheduler: Process priority fed back to parent?
From: Muli Ben-Yehuda
Date: Tue Mar 16 2004 - 11:20:11 EST
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:19:46AM -0500, Timothy Miller wrote:
> Unfortunately, the OS has to play babysitter to processes, because
> they're guaranteed to misbehave. Preemption exists to ensure fairness
> amongst processes. Thus, while you're right that it would be nice to
> have processes report their CPU requirements, if we were to actually DO
> that, it would be a disaster.
I agree we should do the best thing possible without any prior
knowledge of what a process should do. I don't agree we should add
pointless complexity to the scheduler for dubious gains (getting rid
of the very short ramp up time). Of course, if you think it's useful,
feel free to implement it and let's resume the discussion when we have
http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/
Description: Digital signature