From: crimsun@fungus.sh.nu
To: Rob Landley <landley@trommello.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: O(1) scheduler vs 2.4.19-rc1 (question).
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:14:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020702161417.A14646@fungus.sh.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020702210905.687588B4@merlin.webofficenow.com>; from landley@trommello.org on Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 11:33:36AM -0400
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 11:33:36AM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> I'm finally getting around to playing with the O(1) scheduler (well I found a
> way to break something that this might help), and I'm a bit confused as to
> what to apply to get the newest version running on 2.4.19-rc1:
The last one you list below is the latest.
> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-O1-2.4.18-pre8-K3.patch
> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-2.4.19-pre10-ac2-A4
> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/O(1)-scheduler/sched-2.4.19-pre10-ac2-B3
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 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?
While it's certainly nice, I think Ingo and Robert both stated best that
it's best not to change this in vanilla 2.4 where accountable behavior
should remain for a stable-branch kernel.
> 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...
Against the -ac tree itself as stated in the patch name. For the record,
2.4.19-pre10-ac2 has been solid here in various incarnations for nearly
a month.
> 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.
See above (and below). :)
> 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...
Ingo's mail dated 01 July 11:49:39 +0200 (CEST) has
sched-2.4.19-pre10-ac2-B3 as the latest.
--
Dan Chen crimsun@fungus.sh.nu
GPG key: www.sh.nu/~crimsun/pubkey.gpg.asc
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-02 23:11 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
2002-07-02 23:14 ` crimsun [this message]
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=20020702161417.A14646@fungus.sh.nu \
--to=crimsun@fungus.sh.nu \
--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®