[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 1/3] perf/core: use rb trees for pinned/flexible groups
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:17:46AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> Makes sense. The implementation becomes a bit simpler. The drawbacks
> may be several rotations of potentially big tree on the critical path,
> instead of updating four pointers in case of the tree of lists.

Yes, but like said, it allows implementing a better scheduler than RR,
allowing us to fix rotation artifacts where task runtimes are near the
rotation window.

A slightly more complicated, but also interested scheduling problem is
the per-cpu flexible vs the per-task flexible. Ideally we'd rotate them
at the same priority based on service, without strictly prioritizing the
per-cpu events.

Again, that is something that should be possible once we have a more
capable event scheduler.

So yes, cons and pros.. :-)

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-07 10:40    [W:0.551 / U:0.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site