Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 20:05:43 -0500 From: Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@FreeBSD.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: One Priority Per Run Queue Message-ID: <ba5c8166-5811-09a8-6a07-0e298ef7154f@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfogvSXzHT33JxzvZ%2B0h8BjRetM=-vkPjzhyNJgznPhAnQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <1aafd6a2-828c-06f5-bdac-e4c953a403b5@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfogvSXzHT33JxzvZ%2B0h8BjRetM=-vkPjzhyNJgznPhAnQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03/29/2017 16:18, Warner Losh wrote: > How does this scheme prevent starvation of low priority processes? Or > rather, how will this change after this change. I don't know. How does the current scheme do this? I had thought the rationale for assigning four priorities to each run queue was that it was "good enough" and the smaller number of run queues reduced the overhead of the scheduler. Is there a more interesting reason that I'm missing? (This wouldn't be the first time.) Cheers, Eric
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ba5c8166-5811-09a8-6a07-0e298ef7154f>