Linux Kernel Development¶
Love, R. (2010). Linux Kernel Development. Addison-Wesley.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Allocation
- Meanwhile, a Linux kernel scheduler (Love 2010) allocates CPU time-slices across runnable processes using the Completely Fair Scheduler: supply is CPU cycles per second; claimants are runnable processes; feasibility constraint is total time conservation; assignment mapping is the scheduling decision; selection criterion is "virtual runtime" weighted by process priority, approximating proportional fairness.
This sourceStandard reference on Linux kernel internals describing the Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS) as a virtual-runtime-based proportional-fairness allocation of CPU cycles across runnable processes. SUPPORTS the CPU-scheduling (CFS) example.
- Meanwhile, a Linux kernel scheduler (Love 2010) allocates CPU time-slices across runnable processes using the Completely Fair Scheduler: supply is CPU cycles per second; claimants are runnable processes; feasibility constraint is total time conservation; assignment mapping is the scheduling decision; selection criterion is "virtual runtime" weighted by process priority, approximating proportional fairness.
Domain-specific¶
- Heap
- Operating systems — priority schedulers and timer / retry-backoff structures (with the caveat that some modern schedulers, e.g. CFS, realize the same priority-queue ADT with a balanced tree instead
This sourceThe Linux Completely Fair Scheduler keeping runnable tasks in a red-black tree keyed by virtual runtime and running the leftmost node, in place of a heap.
SupportedVerified against the source
- Operating systems — priority schedulers and timer / retry-backoff structures (with the caveat that some modern schedulers, e.g. CFS, realize the same priority-queue ADT with a balanced tree instead
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:22b10836c5d8 · see in the full table