From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Rob Landley <landley@trommello.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: O(1) scheduler vs 2.4.19-rc1 (question).
Date: 02 Jul 2002 15:05:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1025647505.11052.1320.camel@sinai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020702210905.687588B4@merlin.webofficenow.com>
On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 08:33, Rob Landley wrote:
> 1) The 2.4.18-pre8 patch is from February 7th. Is that really the latest one
> for straight 2.4? If nobody's found even a typo in the thing for almost five
> months, can we expect it in 2.4.20-pre1?
That is the latest patch Ingo has. I have been generating 2.4 patches
now and the latest (for 2.4.19-rc1) is at:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml/sched/ingo-O1/sched-O1-rml-2.4.19-rc1-1.patch
People have found bugs and there is still active development. The last
patch being against 2.4.18-pre8 should not mean otherwise. Neither Ingo
nor I plan to pursue the O(1) scheduler in 2.4, especially not starting
with 2.4.20-pre.
Enjoy it in 2.5 or get 2.4-ac or the above patch.
> 2) Do the -ac patches bring the 2.4-mt O(1) up to the level that's in the -ac
> tree, or are they against the -ac tree itself? I'd happily run the -ac tree
> except it doesn't HAVE stable releases, it has "it compiled" releases which
> do tend to be fairly stable but don't have nice clustering points where
> enough people are running that particular variant that they can tell you what
> the inevitable bugs actually are...
I do not know if I agree with your view of 2.4-ac, but nonetheless I
have kept the scheduler in there fairly up-to-date. The patches above
of Ingo's will bring 2.4.19-pre10-ac2 up-to-date with the very latest
code.
> 3) Is any of the stuff in ingo's directory actually the latest version? I
> know he wrote it, but I've watched about five other people patch it (Robert
> Love, etc.), and I didn't keep close track at the time but I'm fairly certain
> it was more recent than February.
The 2.4-ac stuff is recent, obviously the 2.4.18-pre8 thing is a bit out
of date.
Ingo is still active in development, he just does not have the latest
2.4 stock patch. See mine above.
> 4) What's with the version numbers? I don't THINK the "B3" patch backlevels
> K3 in a more recent -ac version, especially since "B3" is dated july and "K3"
> is dated february... I seem to have missed a curve somewhere...
>
> 5) Huh?
Eh?
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-02 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-02 15:33 Rob Landley
2002-07-02 22:05 ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-07-02 23:14 ` crimsun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1025647505.11052.1320.camel@sinai \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=landley@trommello.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®