Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: Michael Schnell <mschnell_at_bschnell_dot_de@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:31:50 +0100
Since it
maintains RB Tree and always pick the root node to run, its a O(1)
scheduler. It has a separate process to maintain RB tree which run
independent of scheduler.
Now this again is interesting regarding embedded use.
I learned that it needs a lot of code and RAM to do an O(1) scheduler.
While with many processes, this is very appropriate, for embedded projects with only a few active processes, the old O(N) scheduler is a lot faster - especially when the cache size is limited, which also is true with most embedded projects.
So it might be a good idea to use the old O(N) scheduler with (small) embedded devices. Is there a possibility to drop same in when compiling the Kernel ?
-Michael
.
- References:
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: Juergen Beisert
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: Michael Schnell
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: Juergen Beisert
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: Michael Schnell
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- From: bansal
- Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- Prev by Date: Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- Next by Date: Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- Previous by thread: Re: CFS and O(1) scheduler
- Next by thread: arm-linux-cpp: installation problem, cannot exec `cc1plus': No such file or directory
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|