lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: BFS v0.311 CPU scheduler for 2.6.32
Hi Con,

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 01:00:54PM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > If you are not doing your unpaid kernel work for yourself and for people
> > who recognize/use it then upstream maintainers not liking your changes
> > should really be the least of your worries..
> >
>
> Wait, this does not make sense. There's a cyclical flaw in this reasoning. If
> I cared about their acknowledgment, I would make it mainline mergeable and
> argue a case for it, which I do not want to do.
>
> I'm happy to make reasonable changes to the code consistent with what people
> who use it want, but what exactly is the point of making it mainline mergeable
> if it will not be merged?

Many people build their own kernels by :
1) applying a lot of patches on them (stable + features)
2) using machine-specific configs

You will get far more testers if they can use the same kernel and
just play with their config files than if they have to patch/unpatch
depending on what they need to have.

I personally would love to be able to add BFS into my kernels for
testing purposes, comparison, and possibly to propose enhancements
and fixes. But I don't want to *replace* mainline code.

Also, I like to have the same kernel sources used on my desktop,
notebook, eeepc, and my bootable USB key. It is a lot easier to
upgrade and a lot easier to spot bugs before they strike in sensible
environments.

Regards,
Willy



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-12 06:57    [W:0.040 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site