Re: Comments on the KSE option

From: Julian Elischer <julian_at_elischer.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:36:41 -0700
>> Julian
> 
> As you are emphasizing fairness, I must say I don't believe fairness in
> libpthread either, 

you mean you don't think it is a good idea or that you don't think it 
works? (sorry, I know that your english is way better than my
chinese ;-)


> I don't think writing a fairness scheduler is an
> easy work, does kernel have made fairness for threads in same ksegrp,
> so does libpthread's userland scheduler ?

The kernel is only responsible for making sure that one ksegrp
(usually a process in my original idea) is not unfair to another
ksegrp.
What happens within the ksegrp is not it's interest. And no it
isn't an easy thing to do which is why I had hoped that some
PhD student would have taken it up by now :-)




> they don't, it can make threads
> in same ksegrp misbehaviored, so what we have done is still process
> scheduling fairness even  there is ksegrp in kernel, and now sacrificed
> fairness between threads.

once again, I'm not sure what you mean by that.


> 
> David Xu
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
Received on Sat Oct 28 2006 - 02:36:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:01 UTC