Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 10:43:16 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> Subject: Re: New Linux threading model Message-ID: <XFMail.20020920104316.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0209201112230.1857-100000@imladris.surriel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20-Sep-2002 Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Bill Huey wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 12:08:38AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: >> > HI and thanks for the pointers. >> > >> > it's interesting that the features that they talk about >> > as being difficult and 'required' generally just "fall out" of the >> > KSE implimentation. A lot of the shortcomings of M:N that they >> > quote don't apply to the KSE schemes either.. >> >> Mingo's O(1) scheduler is pretty snazzy ( high brow technical term ;) ) >> with how it migrates/load balances tasks between various CPUs, maintains >> cache coherency, > > What's maybe more important about the O(1) scheduler is that it > doesn't try to recalculate the priority of all processes once > in a while, like the FreeBSD scheduler and the old Linux scheduler. Yes, schedcpu() needs to die die die and be replaced by a more event-driven model. :) -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - 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?XFMail.20020920104316.jhb>