From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753954AbXDQDk7@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753954AbXDQDk7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:40:59 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753959AbXDQDk7
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:40:59 -0400
Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44310 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753954AbXDQDk6 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:40:58 -0400
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:40:50 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>, Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, ck list <ck@vds.kolivas.org>,
       Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
Message-ID: <20070417034050.GD25513@wotan.suse.de>
References: <20070413202100.GA9957@elte.hu> <200704151327.13589.kernel@kolivas.org> <1176619384.6222.70.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <46240F98.3020800@bigpond.net.au> <1176776941.6222.21.camel@Homer.simpson.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1176776941.6222.21.camel@Homer.simpson.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:29:01AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 10:06 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> > Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > Demystify what?   The casual observer need only read either your attempt
> > > at writing a scheduler, or my attempts at fixing the one we have, to see
> > > that it was high time for someone with the necessary skills to step in.
> > 
> > Make that "someone with the necessary clout".
> 
> No, I was brutally honest to both of us, but quite correct.
> 
> > > Now progress can happen, which was _not_ happening before.
> > > 
> > 
> > This is true.
> 
> Yup, and progress _is_ happening now, quite rapidly.

Progress as in progress on Ingo's scheduler. I still don't know how we'd
decide when to replace the mainline scheduler or with what.

I don't think we can say Ingo's is better than the alternatives, can we?
If there is some kind of bakeoff, then I'd like one of Con's designs to
be involved, and mine, and Peter's...

Maybe the progress is that more key people are becoming open to the idea
of changing the scheduler.