Conversation
Edited 1 month ago
"And you get a scheduler, and you get a scheduler, and you get a scheduler"

[ stolen from a colleague ]

3
6
9

@rostedt "And you get a malloc, and you get a malloc, and you get a malloc"

[ stolen from Steven ]

I'm eagerly waiting for downstream policy on this 😃

0
0
0

@andree Actually, the issue is the opposite. What we have is a one size scheduler that fits everyone. But I think it’s more like all season tires. Where they suck in all seasons, but suck equally. The issue I found most frustrating with making changes to the scheduler, is that you may make a change that helps your specific workload, but will cause regressions in someone else’s workload, and your change much be reverted. Now you are stuck with either our of tree patches, or your workflow suffers.

I’m not a big fan of BPF, but I have been a long advocate for pluggable schedulers. My preference would have been true kernel modules, or config options (like file systems), as BPF programs are IMO harder to collaborate on.

1
0
1