Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:24:15 -0400 From: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com> To: George Mitchell <george+freebsd@m5p.com> Cc: Rozhuk Ivan <rozhuk.im@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Periodic rant about SCHED_ULE Message-ID: <CACpH0McB=xfKNZFFZL6U94sxH%2B2sjqj3yk5PrHnQHUd5zLT34A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <bc360223-6a4e-96f0-8630-e52ff7b35fc3@m5p.com> References: <13445948-7804-20b4-4ae6-aaac14d11e87@m5p.com> <20210708101907.0be3a3c2@rimwks.local> <CACpH0Mfayj2Teeyt0gF4nKvFv9dfcOeNWzP-Tacv_UHxiCerxA@mail.gmail.com> <bc360223-6a4e-96f0-8630-e52ff7b35fc3@m5p.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--00000000000066bbae05c708b33a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Also, TBH, I think the goals, proof that algorithm meets the goals and then code is one of the shining examples of FreeBSD engineering. It's one of the things I point to when people ask why I like FreeBSD (after the licence and the governance)... and thats in sched_4bsd.c. On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 6:21 PM George Mitchell <george+freebsd@m5p.com> wrote: > On 7/13/21 6:09 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: > > [...] > > TBH, I think SCHED_ULE is a failure and the only reason more people don't > > think so is that processors are now largely too fast for people to care. > > [...] > I won't call it a failure, but I will call it the wrong default for the > GENERIC build. And you're certainly right about why people don't care. > -- George > > > > I know we don't have guiding principles for nice, but I would toss out > the > > +/- five rule for it --- that any process more than 5 nice levels lower > > from a cpu-busy process shouldn't preempt the higher process. I realize > we > > have rtprio, but it's a pain to use. Anyways, don't let this last > comment > > distract. > > [...] > > --00000000000066bbae05c708b33a--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACpH0McB=xfKNZFFZL6U94sxH%2B2sjqj3yk5PrHnQHUd5zLT34A>