On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 13:26:48 +0100, Steve Dodd <dirk@loth.demon.co.uk> said:
> Does the scheduler prefer processes which share vm space with the
> current task?
Not yet.
> As I see it, threads are just special processes, so the scheduler may
> just switch to a completely different process anyway and incur the TLB
> flush.
Correct. Actually, Ingo, this is not a bad idea --- are your new
scheduler patches doing this? Giving a small goodness boost to related
threads when one thread blocks is not much different in principle to the
CPU-binding boost we already have. In both cases, we really only end up
changing the order in which we consider runnable tasks, we don't
actually credit the chosen tasks with any extra "counter" cycles. The
biggest problem might be that in the case where we have one
highly-threaded tasks, we'd need to be careful not to starve out other
processes.
--Stephen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/