Re: [SCHED] wrong priority calc - SIMPLE test case

[Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> (by way of Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>)]

On Saturday 14 January 2006 03:15, Mike Galbraith wrote:
 > At 01:34 AM 1/14/2006 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
 > >On Saturday 14 January 2006 00:01, Mike Galbraith wrote:
 > > > At 09:51 PM 1/13/2006 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
 > > > >See my followup patches that I have posted following "[PATCH 0/5]
 > > > > sched - interactivity updates". The first 3 patches are what you
 > > > > tested. These patches are being put up for testing hopefully in -mm.
 > > >
 > > > Then the (buggy) version of my simple throttling patch will need to
 > > > come out.  (which is OK, I have a debugged potent++ version)
 > >
 > >Your code need not be mutually exclusive with mine. I've simply damped the
 > >current behaviour. Your sanity throttling is a good idea.
 >
 > I didn't mean to imply that they're mutually exclusive, and after doing
 > some testing, I concluded that it (or something like it) is definitely
 > still needed.  The version that's in mm2 _is_ buggy however, so ripping it
 > back out wouldn't hurt my delicate little feelings one bit.  In fact, it
 > would give me some more time to instrument and test integration with your
 > changes.

Ok I've communicated this to Andrew (cc'ed here too) so he should remove your
patch pending a new version from you.

 > (Which I think are good btw because they remove what I considered
 > to be warts; the pipe and uninterruptible sleep barriers.

Yes I felt your abuse wrt to these in an earlier email...

 > Um... try irman2
 > now... pure evilness)

Hrm I've been using staircase which is immune for so long I'd all but
forgotten about this test case. Looking at your code I assume your changes
should help this?

Con
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/