lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
FromCon Kolivas <>
SubjectRe: 2.6 vs 2.4, ssh terminal slowdown
DateMon, 13 Feb 2006 17:08:51 +1100
On Monday 13 February 2006 16:57, MIke Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 16:37 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Monday 13 February 2006 16:32, MIke Galbraith wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 16:05 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > > On Monday 13 February 2006 15:59, MIke Galbraith wrote:
> > > > > Now, let's see if we can get your problem fixed with something that
> > > > > can possibly go into 2.6.16 as a bugfix.  Can you please try the
> > > > > below?> > > >> > > > These sorts of changes definitely need to pass through -mm first...
> > > > and don't forget -mm looks quite different to mainline.> > >> > > I'll leave that up to Ingo of course, and certainly have no problem
> > > with them burning in mm.  However, I must say that I personally
> > > classify these two changes as being trivial and obviously correct
> > > enough to be included in 2.6.16.> >> > This part I agree with:> > -               } else> > -                       requeue_task(next, array);> > +               }> >> > The rest changes behaviour; it's not a "bug" so needs testing, should be
> > a separate patch from this part, and modified to suit -mm.>> Well, both change behavior, and I heartily disagree.  

The first change was the previous behaviour for some time. Your latter change 
while it makes sense has never been in the kernel. Either way I don't 
disagree with your reasoning but most things that change behaviour should go 
through -mm. The first as I said was the behaviour in mainline for some time 
till my silly requeue change.

Cheers,
Con

> Blocking a 700ms > sleep while allowing a 100ms sleep to bypass the same checkpoint only to
> then be multiplied by 10 is a bug.>> Actually, the point at which a task becomes interactive is the point at
> which scheduler semantics change.  Ergo, as far as I'm concerned, this
> should be a boundary which must be crossed before proceeding further.
> That, I agree, would be a behavioral change which should be baked in mm.
-
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: 2006-02-13 06:11    [W:0.281 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans