> Finally, I will again point out to all the naysayers out there, that
> the change I propose:
>
> - adds very little extra code
> - simplies existing code paths
> - improves RT performance under all conditions
These 3 points are definately true.
> - improves non-RT performance under all conditions
I'm not sure about this... I am sure that we won't be able
to measure the difference however ;)
My doubt is mainly between improvement and no improvement.
Like Richard, I'm quite sure that there won't be any loss.
> - properly isolates RT processes from normal processes in the
> scheduler
> - reduces the scope for bugs in the scheduler code.
These points are valid too. In the current scheduler code,
a process meets 3 separate tests if(p->policy != SCHED_OTHER),
it sure would be nice to separate the paths and make the
asm a little bit more straightforward (and faster).
Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/