[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Position paper

From: Pierre THIERRY
Subject: Re: Position paper
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 23:45:25 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

Scribit Tom Bachmann dies 06/01/2007 hora 19:26:
> I don't think cpu time pools are to be passed to servers. Although
> this would increase accounting, it would as well horrify the
> complexity of the server and require special kernel support, as has
> been discussed on the list (or on coyotos-dev?).

Won't Coyotos has scheduler activations, or the primitives needed to
implement them? I thought they would make such designs relatively easy
to implement? (but I confess I did not dig the issue of scheduler
activations deeply, and I barely grasp the concept...)

OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]