From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: rml@mvista.com
Cc: alan@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4-ac: sparc64 support for O(1) scheduler
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 06:22:33 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020615.062233.123620674.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1024075953.4799.224.camel@sinai>
From: Robert Love <rml@mvista.com>
Date: 14 Jun 2002 10:32:32 -0700
I am explicitly refraining from sending Alan any code that is not
well-tested in 2.5 and my machines first. As Ingo's new switch_mm()
bits are not even in 2.5 yet, I plan to wait a bit before sending
them... (I am currently putting together all the scheduler bits we have
been working on for a 2.4-ac patch...)
Your sparc64 kernel/sched.c bits have zero testing in any kernel.
What point are you trying to make? It disables a very important
optimization on SMP sparc64. It's simply unacceptable.
Ingo's change which deletes the frozen locking bits has to be
installed with the patches which allow sparc64 to continue working
without the deadlock bug, they cannot be added seperately.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-15 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-13 19:21 Robert Love
2002-06-14 4:25 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-14 17:32 ` Robert Love
2002-06-15 13:22 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2002-06-20 19:42 ` Alan Cox
2002-06-16 15:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-16 17:00 ` [patch] 2.4.19-pre10-ac2: O(1) scheduler merge, -A3 Ingo Molnar
2002-06-16 23:57 ` Robert Love
2002-06-17 0:13 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-06-17 4:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 0:15 ` Robert Love
2002-06-17 3:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 3:57 ` Robert Love
2002-06-17 4:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 4:02 ` Robert Love
2002-06-17 4:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 4:49 ` [patch] 2.5.22 current scheduler bits #1 Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 3:24 ` [patch] 2.4.19-pre10-ac2: O(1) scheduler merge, -A3 Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 3:35 ` Robert Love
2002-06-17 4:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 7:50 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-17 8:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 8:23 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-17 9:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-17 9:34 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-06-18 7:16 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-19 1:05 ` Matthew Dobson
2002-06-20 20:22 ` Andrew Theurer
2002-06-24 0:16 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-06-17 16:26 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-17 4:51 ` Toshiba PCToPIC97 PC Card freeze in 2.4.18 Stephen Satchell
2002-06-16 23:45 ` [PATCH] 2.4-ac: sparc64 support for O(1) scheduler Robert Love
2002-06-17 5:28 ` David S. Miller
2002-06-17 21:18 ` Robert Love
2002-06-14 22:00 ` Thomas Duffy
2002-06-15 13:35 ` David S. Miller
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=20020615.062233.123620674.davem@redhat.com \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@mvista.com \
/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®