RE: Hurd Advocacy?

["deFreese, Barry" <Barry.deFreese@nike.com>]

> > L4 also provides for user-space scheduling, besides the standard
> > in-kernel scheduler. Putting the scheduling policy out of the
> > kernel opens up new interesting possibilities, like, perhaps
> > real-time threads and better support for SMP systems as well.
> 
> The choice of the processor to run on is also not free for 
> the user, because
> that would open the system to DoS attacks.  For example, 
> let's say you run
> an important task on processor A.  Then N users tasks can 
> cooperate in that
> they all choose to run on processor A.
> 
> So although the scheduling parameters in L4 are interesting, 
> and will make
> it possible to provide exciting user level features like real 
> time, it is
> still entirely open how this could be done "the Hurd way". ;)
> 
> Thanks,
> Marcus
> 
> -- 
> `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    
> marcus@gnu.org
> Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd 
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/


Speaking of SMP.  If (when?) we shoot for SMP support would we shoot for
processor affinity or leave it up to the scheduler like in Linux?

Thanks,

Barry deFreese
Technology Services Manager
Nike Team Sports
(949)-616-4005
Barry.deFreese@nike.com

--
"Technology doesn't make you less stupid; it just makes you stupid faster."
Jerry Gregoire - Former CIO at Dell