| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Why not a strait forward approach.Why not a strait forward approach.Posted Mar 16, 2007 17:31 UTC (Fri) by vmole (guest, #111)In reply to: Why not a strait forward approach. by aashenfe Parent article: RSDL hits a snag
Because such an approach is not, in fact, straight-forward. The current scheduler does attempt to identify "interactiveness" and boost such processes. The problem is that the heuristics involved are complicated and not at all obvious, leading to a lot of dissastifaction among the kernel developers; one gets the impression that Linus tolerated the current scheduler only because nothing better was available. There's a *lot* of enthusiasm on the lkml for RSDL, I doubt a few corner case regressions will keep it out, because *all* of the schedulers have bad corner cases, and making them more complicated doesn't seem to prevent that, it just moves them around.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||