On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 11:11 AM Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > > > - How is this supposed to work with different applications requiring > > > different sched_ext schedulers? [...] > Long term, the tentative plan is to support a hierarchy of schedulers where > the intermediate schedulers are responsible for granting CPUs to leaf > schedulers which are responsible for scheduling tasks. Barret Rhoden has a > framework called flux on top of ghost which already implements this albeit > with compile time composition. Nothing is set in stone yet but it's likely > that I'll follow what Barret is doing in many parts. > > Taking a step back, because sched_ext currently supports a single > system-wide scheduler, many of the techniques that the current crop of > schedulers are playing with are pretty generic, at least to a class of > problems - e.g. gaming. [...] > So, the summary is that there are plans to support a tree of schedulers but > we're currently mostly focusing on more generic single scheduler > experiments. [...] Yes, as I've just mentioned in another message in this thread, we plan to explore building UMCG-like per-process scheduling infra on top of sched_ext once it is merged into the mainline kernel. This is not a promise to actually do that (build such an infra); but rather a claim that we believe it is possible to do that and that we plan to look into the technical details once sched_ext is merged.
