-----Original Message----- > Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 13:47:52 -0500 > From: Brian Brooks <brian.bro...@arm.com> > To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org > Subject: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH v2 00/16] A scalable software scheduler > X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.12.2 > > This work derives from Ola Liljedahl's prototype [1] which introduced a > scalable scheduler design based on primarily lock-free algorithms and > data structures designed to decrease contention. A thread searches > through a data structure containing only queues that are both non-empty > and allowed to be scheduled to that thread. Strict priority scheduling is > respected, and (W)RR scheduling may be used within queues of the same > priority. > Lastly, pre-scheduling or stashing is not employed since it is optional > functionality that can be implemented in the application. > > In addition to scalable ring buffers, the algorithm also uses unbounded > concurrent queues. LL/SC and CAS variants exist in cases where absense of > ABA problem cannot be proved, and also in cases where the compiler's atomic > built-ins may not be lowered to the desired instruction(s). Finally, a version > of the algorithm that uses locks is also provided. > > See platform/linux-generic/include/odp_config_internal.h for further build > time configuration. > > Use --enable-schedule-scalable to conditionally compile this scheduler > into the library.
This is an interesting stuff. Do you have any performance/latency numbers in comparison to exiting scheduler for completing say two stage(ORDERED->ATOMIC) or N stage pipeline on any platform? When we say scalable scheduler, What application/means used to quantify scalablity?? Do you have any numbers in comparison to existing scheduler to show magnitude of the scalablity on any platform?
