From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756078AbXG1R0S (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:26:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753481AbXG1R0D (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:26:03 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:36820 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751860AbXG1R0B (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:26:01 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 10:25:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Michael Chang cc: Kasper Sandberg , CK Mailinglist , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1185588279.1654.1.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Michael Chang wrote: > > I do recall there is one issue on which Con wouldn't budge -- anything > that involved boosting certain kinds of processes in the kernel. I did that myself, so that's a non-issue. No. The complaints were about the CK scheduler not being as responsive under load as even the _old_ scheduler was. I don't know why people ignore this fact. It was a long thread back in March or April, and I'm pretty sure the CK mailing list was cc'd. Sure, most people don't actually have load-averages above ten etc, but it's important to do those well _too_. Linus