lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch, 2.6.11-rc2] sched: RLIMIT_RT_CPU_RATIO feature
From
Date

> On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 23:10 -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
>> Is nobody responsible for figuring out what users need? I didn't
>> realize kernel development had become so disconnected.

Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> writes:
> IMHO the requirements gathering process usually works well. When
> someone with a redhat.com (for example) address posts a patch there's an
> implicit assumption that it addresses the needs of their gadzillions of
> users. Still, RH hires professional kernel developers, people who
> produce known good code will always have an easier time getting patches
> merged. If Linus & co. don't know you from Adam and you show up with a
> patch that claims to solve a big problem, then I would expect them to be
> a bit skeptical. Especially if the problem is either low priority or
> not well understood by the major distros.

I guess you're right, Lee. I hadn't thought of it that way. It just
looks broken to me because we have no standing in any normal kernel
requirements process. That's a shame, but it does seem less like a
systemic issue.

I think the distributions are getting more interested in these issues.
Maybe that will help. The RT-LSM is available as a module in Debian
sarge.

Back when I did OS development for a living, there was a huge focus on
defining user requirements. But, our kernel development was never
organizationally separate from the rest of the OS. That makes a big
difference.
--
joq
-
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 14:10    [W:1.358 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site