From years of reading Phoronix articles, scheduling is generally one area where Linux really shines compared to other OSs. There are particular workloads where someone does better but not overall. And many of the problems described in this article are complaints about Linux trading off what's best for HPC users against approaches that are better on servers or user devices. Like, the overload-on-wakeup behavior is absolutely what you want on anything battery powered even if it hurts in TPC-H.
> the kernel has (always) offered various schedulers but you have to pick one
Umm, mainline kernel has had only CFS scheduler available for the past 15 years. Sure, there are some out of tree options available, but with those comes the common problems of using out of tree patchsets.
Actually the history of how pluggable schedulers came to be in the kernel is a fascinating one, and one I recall watching unfold in the mid-2000s. There were out of tree schedulers and a pluggable scheduler implementation put forward by Con Kolivas before Ingo introduced the CFS patch, and a lot of frustration that pluggable scheduler patch sets were rejected up until that point.
