David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk> wrote:
> That is unlikely to be useful unless:
> - you assign a cpu to the scheduler
> - one scheduler is higher priority than any other.
Well, it *IS* useful, or maybe I misunderstood something.
Different schedulers could use different data (locks, counters, bitmaps, etc),
different runqueue structures. Why not to allow to allocate and manage this
data for scheduler's module? IMHO, this is a good structural abstraction.

> I suspect you need to separate process scheduling from process dispatching.
Well, that is what Daniel's API does and should do. Are you talking about
something concrete in process dispatching?

> > As an example, think of Mindaugas' Linux-like scheduler.
> Is that the one that refuses to allow high priority processes to pre-empt
> low priority ones for large fractions of a second ? :-)
Heh.. which was that?

-- 
Best regards,
Mindaugas