![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
--Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote (on Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:23:12 -0700): > Matthew Dobson <colpatch@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> I would like to try to get this in before then, unless this will really >> make things difficult for you. > > It's about three weeks late for 2.6.9. I already have a string of CPU > scheduler patches awaiting the 2.6.10 stream and once we're at -rc2 we > really should only be looking at bugfixes. Yup, seems a bit late for that, but early 2.6.10 would be nice if possible? > Grumble, mutter.. it looks like one of those "if it compiled, it works" > things. Problem is, any time anyone touches that particular piece of the > kernel, half the architectures stop compiing. I tested it - worked for me ;-) This is the first step to getting the arches to actually use the flexibility we had, and stop Andi complaining the scheduler is tuned for one arch rather than another ;-) These params definitely need to be per arch/subarch, and probably some other ones too, but this seems like a good start. M. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||