From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
mpm@selenic.com, paul@linuxaudiosystems.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.X, NPTL, SCHED_FIFO and JACK
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 20:05:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040702030547.GI21066@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40E4D08B.1070608@kolivas.org>
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 01:03:39PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> My impetus for doing a policy rewrite was the recurring complaint that
> the 2.6 scheduler is currently too complicated for even basic
> scheduling. I see no point in trying to implement other changes until
> the framework for normal policies is in place that can be built on. I
> don't see even the policy rewrites as being appropriate for 2.6, let
> alone anything fancier. If we have something in place that more people
> than not agree is satisfactory for normal scheduling, then more can be
> added for 2.7+ development.
The point I had was really that what's going on is very minor.
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-02 3:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-30 13:41 2.6.X, NPTL, SCHED_FIFO and JACK Paul Davis
2004-06-30 15:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-06-30 15:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-06-30 15:26 ` Jakub Jelinek
2004-06-30 16:32 ` Paul Davis
2004-06-30 16:57 ` Jakub Jelinek
2004-06-30 17:52 ` Paul Davis
2004-06-30 15:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-06-30 16:12 ` Paul Davis
2004-06-30 17:07 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-06-30 17:50 ` Paul Davis
2004-07-01 18:03 ` Matt Mackall
2004-07-01 18:14 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-01 22:45 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-02 0:45 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-02 1:38 ` Peter Williams
2004-07-02 2:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-02 3:03 ` Con Kolivas
2004-07-02 3:05 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-07-02 3:27 ` Paul Davis
2004-07-02 7:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-02 10:40 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-07-06 0:48 ` Peter Williams
2004-07-02 14:42 ` Paul Davis
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=20040702030547.GI21066@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=paul@linuxaudiosystems.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.