From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932131AbYDLMWZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:22:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759494AbYDLMWR (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:22:17 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:60876 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760035AbYDLMWR (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:22:17 -0400 Subject: Re: modifying CFS failure From: Peter Zijlstra To: cs044024@mnnit.ac.in Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar In-Reply-To: <42423.210.212.49.15.1207972006.squirrel@mail.mnnit.ac.in> References: <42423.210.212.49.15.1207972006.squirrel@mail.mnnit.ac.in> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 14:22:03 +0200 Message-Id: <1208002923.7427.5.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Please provide it as a series of patches against sched-devel/latest. Just plain AVL code and a huge modified CFS backport make it impossible to tell what changed and why. Which brings us to the question: _why_. That is, why are you trying to replace the rb-tree with an avl tree? Just because the worst case depth of the avl is slightly better than for an rb-tree, which can be offset by the slightl more expesive balance operations. I'm glad people are working on CFS - its an interesting piece of the kernel after all, but provide it in a regular patch series, this is impossible to work with, sorry.