Skip to contentSkip to conversation

2.4 O(1) scheduler

DISCUSSION anton wilson 4 participants 7 messages Jul 19, 2002 – Jul 21, 2002

lore
Share & tools
lore

anton wilson

author
#0 lore raw

I'm working on a project that uses the O(1) scheduler and I am forced to use a 2.4 kernel for time issues. Will the O(1) patches for 2.4 kernels be updated once the 2.5.26+ patch becomes stable?

Anton

#1 lore raw

Use 2.4-aa, 2.4-ac or 2.4-redhat kernel
and you get the O(1) secheduler at
no extra cost -

Joe

Quoted 13 lines · anton wilson

I'm working on a project that uses the O(1) scheduler and I am forced to use a 2.4 kernel for time issues. Will the O(1) patches for 2.4 kernels be updated once the 2.5.26+ patch becomes stable?

Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

author
#2 lore raw
Quoted 7 lines · J Sloan

Use 2.4-aa, 2.4-ac or 2.4-redhat kernel
and you get the O(1) secheduler at
no extra cost -

Joe

I'm actually worried not about just the O(1) scheduler but if these patches will be incorporating the O(1) bug fixes such as the serious one in balance_load where curr->next was used instead of current->prev. Also, I need to use a patch that won't tamper with the usb implementation because I'd have to update our current usb driver to fit into the new system, and I'm getting flack about wasting time trying to update that thing already . . . So if you tell me no, I can go tell my boss I have to update the usb driver.

Anton

#3 lore raw

Been using 2.4.19-rc1-aa2 on a fairly large x86 box for about 16 days now. Nothing but love. Using the 0/1 scheduler, though I'm not sure if I could tweak it for "better" performance.(hint: like to see some "best-practices" type of doc, for 4/8-way SMP boxen)

Aside from that, I've got 8GB ram, a ~750GB Oracle instance running, and 4GB SHMMAX attatched to some Copper FC1 disks and using QLA2200's.

It's been very happy since rc1. Anyway, it's worth a shot. As soon as 2.4.19 is "done" this box will go into production as soon as this RC2 VM stuff is cleared up.

Quoted 25 lines · anton wilson
Quoted 7 lines · J Sloan

Use 2.4-aa, 2.4-ac or 2.4-redhat kernel
and you get the O(1) secheduler at
no extra cost -

Joe

I'm actually worried not about just the O(1) scheduler but if these patches will be incorporating the O(1) bug fixes such as the serious one in balance_load where curr->next was used instead of current->prev. Also, I need to use a patch that won't tamper with the usb implementation because I'd have to update our current usb driver to fit into the new system, and I'm getting flack about wasting time trying to update that thing already . . . So if you tell me no, I can go tell my boss I have to update the usb driver.

Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Signature · 1 line
Austin Gonyou <[email protected]>
#4 lore raw
In reply to anton wilson

Well, I can't speak for Alan, Andrea or Red Hat, but their respective kernels are all likely to be kept pretty well up to date on the current O(1) - that's certainly the case AFAICT -

Joe

Quoted 25 lines · anton wilson
Quoted 10 lines · J Sloan

Use 2.4-aa, 2.4-ac or 2.4-redhat kernel
and you get the O(1) secheduler at
no extra cost -

Quoted 3 lines

Joe

I'm actually worried not about just the O(1) scheduler but if these patches will be incorporating the O(1) bug fixes such as the serious one in balance_load where curr->next was used instead of current->prev. Also, I need to use a patch that won't tamper with the usb implementation because I'd have to update our current usb driver to fit into the new system, and I'm getting flack about wasting time trying to update that thing already . . . So if you tell me no, I can go tell my boss I have to update the usb driver.

Anton

#5 lore raw
In reply to anton wilson
Quoted 3 lines · anton wilson

I'm actually worried not about just the O(1) scheduler but if these patches will be incorporating the O(1) bug fixes such as the serious one in balance_load where curr->next was used instead of current->prev.

It's a harmless bug, somewhat reducing the amount of balancing we can do on SMP, but the balancer was still pretty much intact (we'd have noticed it earlier if it wasnt). The bug was found by Scott Rhine and myself not because the scheduler behaved badly, but via code review, because the comments did not match the code :-)

Ingo

#6 lore raw
In reply to anton wilson
Quoted 3 lines · anton wilson

I'm working on a project that uses the O(1) scheduler and I am forced to use a 2.4 kernel for time issues. Will the O(1) patches for 2.4 kernels be updated once the 2.5.26+ patch becomes stable?

you can find the latest 2.4 based O(1) scheduler patch at:

http://redhat.com/~mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-2.4.19-rc2-A4

this patch includes the load_balance() fixes as well. (generally you should check this directory regularly, sometimes i put out patches without announcing them - like this one.)

Ingo