Our great sponsors
-
-
-
InfluxDB
Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
the yes command, writing to /dev/null, is making IO calls, which interfere with predictable scheduling.
If you look at the source code for yes, https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/src/yes.c
it builds a buffer of output and then writes that in a for loop
while (full_write (STDOUT_FILENO, buf, bufused) == bufused)
I'd like to wager that EEVDF has been tested less methodologically than how this paper investigates CFS. The primary author of EEVDF and maintainer of the subsystem has been dismissing alternative approaches and plethora of robustly tested patches from Google and Facebook over the years, with mostly replies boiling down to "meh I don't like it".
I'd take a patch of CFS and its millions of broken knobs from Google over newly released EEVDF any day, because I trust scheduler AB testing by Google over millions of machines and every single scheduling pattern under the sun way more than whatever synthetic micro-benchmark a single kernel dev (as competent as they might be) ran.
If you're interested in quantitative analysis of schedulers & tooling around it, these 2 projects are very interesting:
https://github.com/google/schedviz
https://fuchsia.dev/fuchsia-src/concepts/kernel/fair_schedul...
Interesting! I've used Linux Mint for the last 5+ years (and am using the Xanmod kernel, which is on 6.6), but have always been Pop OS curious. This increases my curiosity, I may have to give it a go on my laptop.
https://xanmod.org/