From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965686AbXDGJYP (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Apr 2007 05:24:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965692AbXDGJYP (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Apr 2007 05:24:15 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:38924 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965686AbXDGJYO (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Apr 2007 05:24:14 -0400 Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2007 11:24:01 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: Dmitry Adamushko , Linux Kernel , Con Kolivas , Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCH] [sched] redundant reschedule when set_user_nice() boosts a prio of a task from the "expired" array Message-ID: <20070407092401.GB16356@elte.hu> References: <20070404141546.GA862@elte.hu> <20070406170319.2c961eba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070406170319.2c961eba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.1.7 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > so > > - your code only gets publically tested in its against-staircase > version > > - the against-mainline version will get merged without having been > publically tested outside of staircase > > which is probably all OK for a 2.6.22-rc1 thing, provided Ingo can > give a confident ack. it looks good to me - and once i get a non-whitespace-damaged patch i'll put it into -rt so we'll have testing. (this patch should have at most a latency impact, if we forget to preempt somewhere, and -rt users are quite touchy about latencies.) > Where are we at with staircase anyway? Is it looking like a 2.6.22 > thing? I don't personally think we've yet seen enough serious > performance testing to permit a merge, apart from other issues... yes, that's my thinking too at the moment. I'd also like to see a summary of 'open design questions' list from Mike (if Mike has time/energy for that?) - many questions were raised, a good number of them were answered, various changes done to SD but there's no good summary of the current state of affairs. Ingo