own queue? If so, how do the relative priorities happen?
2. Are those all processes in the system, or just ready processes
in the system? Wikipedia says that CFS treats wait time due to
sorry, no CPU for you and wait time due to I don't need the CPU
right now the same, so
Shachar Shemesh shac...@shemesh.biz writes:
Hi all,
I'm trying to understand Linux's Completely Fair Scheduler better
Hi,
Disclaimer: i've never had a chance to look at the CFS nearly as
closely as the previous incarnation [O(1)]. I'll take a shot, though.
1. How do the different
Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
Yes, as in O(1). The implementation of the runqueue has changed in
CFS.
You are hinting that between the run queues nothing has changed. That
seem unlikely to me.
If so, how do the relative priorities happen?
I am not sure what you mean by relative
Shachar Shemesh shac...@shemesh.biz writes:
Yes. One of the things said about CFS was that with it things that
previously required real time priority now can run at nice -20 just
as well. That same text (I don't remember right now where I read
it, nor who wrote it) said that CFS fixed a nice
.
Linux claims that with cfs they have as good as a scheduler as freebsd
-- freebsd uses the unix multilevel feedback queue model. One of the
goals of the multilevel feedback queue is to create a system that is
not jittery -- right now, people running linux on a modern processor
live in a very
Hello All,
Two topics are calling for a lecture which exposes the internals (and
guts) of the new Linux:
*Tickless Kernel - how was it done? What are the mechanisms available
inside the kernel? What is expected of userspace programs? What should
a user do to make the best usage of a tickless
