Re: [RFC] Static/Runtime CPU/IO bound scheduling polices based onCPU(s) to support complete spectrum of tasks

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 13:38 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 15:56 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 17:02 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 12:58 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 03:55:31PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > > I am planning to prepare the followings:
> > > > 
> > > > This seems all quite vague. Perhaps it would be good if you started
> > > > with a clear definition what problem you're trying to solve.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > I do not surprise, if this approach seems vague to many developers
> > because this is many years ahead of time.
> 
> Yes, or not.
> 
> For partitioning we have cpusets, for scheduler policies we have
> sched_setscheduler().
> 
> The only thing we do not have are deadline schedulers, but people are
> working on that -- its a rather complex piece of work.
> 
> The rest of you babbling is hand-waving about heuristics.

I do not know what you read and what you understand.

Can we change the schedulers at runtime ?

Can we specify:
 Task 1-100: Scheduler1
 Task 101-200: Scheduler2

--
JSR

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/