Jonathan Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 02:11:07PM -0800, Scott Rotondo wrote:
>
>> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>>
>>> As far as this case goes, I'd better like to understand why we needed
>>> a new class, instead of just using SYS.
>>>
>> That's the key question, which I haven't really seen anyone address in
>> this PSARC email thread. However, you can find a high-level answer in CR
>> 6806882:
>>
>> "The basic issue is that the SYS scheduling class was not designed for
>> long-running CPU intensive workloads. We introduce a new SDC (System
>> Duty Cycle) scheduling class, which adjusts its threads' priority in
>> order to give them a specified percentage of the processor.
>> It also gives them a scheduling quantum, which gives other threads at
>> the same priority on the same CPU a chance to run."
>>
>
> That being said, I'm looking into just having this be another mode the SYS
> class can run in, so that we don't pollute the namespace.
>
> Attached is the intro to the big theory statement from the project gate.
>
> Cheers,
> - jonathan
>
>
Thanks, this makes the case much easier to understand.
- Garrett
