Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jan 2006 18:11:18 -0800 | From | "Siddha, Suresh B" <> | Subject | Re: smp 'nice' bias support breaks scheduler behavior |
| |
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 12:54:53PM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > It's not my decision to keep Peter's patch out of mainline. If you can make a > strong enough case for it then Linus will merge it up even though it's after > rc1.
I don't want to push Peters patch to 2.6.16, as I haven't tested much.
> Otherwise I'll let Ingo decide on whether to pull the current > implementation or not - you're saying that with the one thing you described > that misbehaves that it is doing more harm than fixing smp nice handling.
Are we sure that it really fixes smp nice handling? Its not just one scenario(bouncing processes on a lightly loaded system), I am talking about. Imbalance calculations will be wrong even on a completely loaded system.. Are you sure that there are no perf regressions with your patch..
Sorry for commenting on this patch so late.. I was on a very long vacation. I think it is safe to back that out for 2.6.16 and do more work and get it in 2.6.17.
thanks, suresh - 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/
| |