On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Dario Faggioli
wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 09:57 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Dario Faggioli
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm just thinking out loud and
>> > wondering:
>> > - could it be useful to have a scheduling analysis in place for
>>
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 09:57 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Dario Faggioli
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm just thinking out loud and
> > wondering:
> > - could it be useful to have a scheduling analysis in place for
> > the
> > scheduler in work conserving mode (one, of course,
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Dario Faggioli
wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 01:15 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
>> Hi Dario,
>>
> Hi,
>
>> I'm thinking about changing the current RTDS scheduler to
>> work-conserving version as we briefly discussed before.
>> Below is a design of the work-conserving RTDS
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 01:15 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
> Hi Dario,
>
Hi,
> I'm thinking about changing the current RTDS scheduler to
> work-conserving version as we briefly discussed before.
> Below is a design of the work-conserving RTDS.
> I'm hoping to get your feedback about the design ideas first
Hi Dario,
I'm thinking about changing the current RTDS scheduler to
work-conserving version as we briefly discussed before.
Below is a design of the work-conserving RTDS.
I'm hoping to get your feedback about the design ideas first before I
start writing it in code.
I think the code change should
