Re: O(1) scheduler & interactivity improvements

[Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>]

At 01:39 PM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
>Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>At 10:18 AM 6/27/2003 +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
>[...]
>
> > (simple?  decode stack, find out where he was sleeping,
>Complicated indeed, but why do that?
>A process sleeping on a pipe will wake up in the kernel's
>pipe reading code, won't it?  No need for guessing where
>it was sleeping.  Code for transferring interactivity
>bonus could go right there.

<G> Suggestion:  Re-read the part you snipped before you submit the patch.

>>What I think kills the priority redistribution idea is _massive_ 
>>complexity.  I don't see anything simple.  You would have to build the 
>>logical connections between tasks, which currently doesn't exist.
>
>I must admit I don't know the details of the scheduler.  Still, Linus
>tried a form of redistribution (the backboost thing).  It helped in some 
>cases.
>It seems to me that it got revoked because it did the wrong
>thing at times, leading to starvation issus that didn't exist before.
>It didn't go because it was overly complex or slow?

It went because it drove the system nuts sometimes.  Too bad that, it was 
lovely for GUI.

         -Mike