From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750797AbXDHK7J (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Apr 2007 06:59:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750827AbXDHK7J (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Apr 2007 06:59:09 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:53967 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750797AbXDHK7I (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Apr 2007 06:59:08 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 12:58:49 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Gene Heskett Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Con Kolivas , Mike Galbraith , Andrew Morton , ck list Subject: Re: Ten percent test Message-ID: <20070408105849.GA15764@elte.hu> References: <200703290237.38777.kernel@kolivas.org> <200704071423.47790.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <20070407185220.GA31725@elte.hu> <200704071630.25830.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <20070408104125.GB11123@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070408104125.GB11123@elte.hu> 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=3.0.3 -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 * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > My question then, is why did it take a very public cat-fight to get > > this looked at and the code adjusted? Its been what, nearly 2 years > > since Linus himself made a comment that this thing needed fixed. > > The fixes then done were of very little actual effectiveness and the > > situation then has gradually deteriorated since. > > this is pretty hard to get right, and the most objective way to change > it is to do it testcase-driven. FYI, interactivity tweaking has been > gradual, the last bigger round of interactivity changes were done a > year ago: and note that a year ago Mike did a larger patch too, not unlike his current patch - but we hoped that his smaller change would be sufficient - and nobody came along and said "i tested Mike's and the difference is significant on my system". Which seems to suggest that the number of problem-systems and worried users/developers isnt particularly large. Ingo