From owner-soc-status@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 8 12:36:05 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: soc-status@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE6B9106566C for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 12:36:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rudotx@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C9FB8FC18 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 12:36:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyh21 with SMTP id 21so1005884wyh.13 for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 05:36:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=UHk8kzbzE2PLC8KBFONpquyC7BSm7g0Y6OxrRfD0+OA=; b=h/cwKcUxIfemKjZoLzN3KMSRHwk5O2FhrwWrjpfRy0dpkZu6W4HM7hq592txxWKj54 QUuOmX4XUyfGwn0jDkeP8JFFCN4z0CZrhOAjtHGT2kWYu1oeJ0eVv8pllDJwTujjwP2M S+7Am6Pp9kIpeVBJfot0XZVkogbqvfoqCQiTw= Received: by 10.227.3.3 with SMTP id 3mr4336223wbl.60.1312806964117; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 05:36:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.93.94 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 05:35:44 -0700 (PDT) From: rudo tomori Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 14:35:44 +0200 Message-ID: To: soc-status@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: BFS scheduler weekly status report X-BeenThere: soc-status@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Summer of Code Status Reports and Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 12:36:05 -0000 Hi, the goal of my project is to implement a BFS - like scheduler into the FreeBSD. I started off with the original 4.4BSD code, and by iterative modifications I will develop a scheduler that matches the BFS design as specified in http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/bfs/sched-BFS.txt. Last week I added the cpuset functionality into the scheduler. I have some suspicions that the preemption mechanism in the scheduler does not work as expected. This week I will run some measurements focused on this and if it really works wrong I will try to fix it. rudo