> A NOTE ABOUT DEADLINES: While fair scheduling is appropriate for the vast majority of workloads, there are some tasks that require very specific timing and/or do not adapt well to overload conditions. For example, these workloads include low-latency audio / graphics, high-frequency sensors, and high-rate / low-latency networking. These specialized tasks are better served with a deadline scheduler, which is planned for later in the Zircon scheduler development cycle.<p>Those seem like important workloads. Does this imply that the deadline scheduler runs concurrently with the fair scheduler? Otherwise, what's the point of developing an ideal scheduler for common workloads if it cannot be used for critical workloads. Is it common to run two different schedulers in the same system?
There are many references to multiple cpu systems throughout the document. Maybe I missed something, but I didn't know Fuschia was aimed at systems like that. I am no expert, but aren't the vast majority of multiple cpu systems servers or high-rnd workstations? If google can supply their own server os, Linux could lose a lot of support and funding
<a href="https://cchalpha.blogspot.com/2019/03/bmq-scheduler-call-out-for-testing.html?m=1" rel="nofollow">https://cchalpha.blogspot.com/2019/03/bmq-scheduler-call-out...</a><p>Someone made a scheduler on linux based on some of the ideas here. Its included in the postfactum (linux-pf) patch set i believe, which might have packages for your distro.
This post has sky-rocketed to the top! I'm genuinely curious: can someone explain what's cool/interesting/important about this (maybe EL5)? Thanks!