lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] proposed scheduler enhancements and fixes
On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, Larry McVoy wrote:

>Anyway, I'm tired so this explanation probably sucks, but the bottom
>line is that if you optimize your scheduler for lat_ctx on an SMP,
>you probably made it slower for real workloads. If Linux has a way to

That was my whole point. I agree completly. I am ok to do something that
may optimize lat_ctx on SMP if it doesn't harm normal workloads though ;).

>If this has done nothing but confuse you, send mail, I'll try again.

No, I agree and it matches with my RL experience. Thanks for the
clarification.

Andrea




-
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 13:56    [W:0.041 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site