![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Rik said: "to wait for the 2nd patch to get something actually working :)" Andrea replied: "You should try it before speak. There's no a second patch because the first one worked fine so far (I had also some nice report from people)." Hi, Andrea, Hi, Rik. Andrea, first of all, thanks for your previous message to me and now I follow your "advice" and I am CC: this message to l-k so all can read. I have applied Andrea's patch to the test machines running 2.1.x and they runs beautifully, no oops yet under extremely heavy load. So Andrea, thank you for a wonderful job done. And oh yes, Andrea, have you backport the thing to 2.0.x yet? Alan Cox is starting the 2.0.37 series, maybe you can get Mr. Cox to include it. And Rik, thanks a lot for your "scheduler" patch. One of my partners-in-crime (we Linux people here are like "criminals" in the Windoze environment, forever finding ways to sneek Linux into their domain, and bits by bits we are hooking the "dozing" folks, and one day soon, I hope, we will completely change the entire enterprise to Linux, but I digress) ran some benchmarks and claimed that with your patch the machine does ran faster. (Sorry I do not have the numbers, I wasn't the one who did the benchmarking.) Thanks again to both of you. Gratefully, Pete teamwork@freemail.c3.hu - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||