* [PATCH] sched domains w27 for 2.6.0
@ 2003-12-19 14:58 Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 11:45 ` Ingo Molnar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nick Piggin @ 2003-12-19 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Zwane Mwaikambo, Rusty Russell
http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w27/
This patch includes a lot of fixes, especially to the active balancing
and HT code. It also addresses Rusty's suggestions, and will hopefully fix
Zwane's interactivity problems. Testing, comments welcome.
Nick
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] sched domains w27 for 2.6.0
2003-12-19 14:58 [PATCH] sched domains w27 for 2.6.0 Nick Piggin
@ 2003-12-20 11:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-20 14:32 ` Nick Piggin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2003-12-20 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nick Piggin; +Cc: linux-kernel
* Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au> wrote:
> http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w27/
>
> This patch includes a lot of fixes, especially to the active balancing
> and HT code. It also addresses Rusty's suggestions, and will hopefully
> fix Zwane's interactivity problems. Testing, comments welcome.
it's looking good so far - this was my final major conceptual peevee.
Active balancing is a pretty essential feature - i'm glad you carried
the concept over from my HT patch. It increases complexity, but it's
worth it.
Ingo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] sched domains w27 for 2.6.0
2003-12-20 11:45 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2003-12-20 14:32 ` Nick Piggin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nick Piggin @ 2003-12-20 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ingo Molnar; +Cc: linux-kernel
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>* Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w27/
>>
>>This patch includes a lot of fixes, especially to the active balancing
>>and HT code. It also addresses Rusty's suggestions, and will hopefully
>>fix Zwane's interactivity problems. Testing, comments welcome.
>>
>
>it's looking good so far - this was my final major conceptual peevee.
>Active balancing is a pretty essential feature - i'm glad you carried
>the concept over from my HT patch. It increases complexity, but it's
>worth it.
>
You'll notice my earlier versions had some type of active balancing.
It was very simple but too dumb, so yes I used ideas from your patch
which seems to be giving good results.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-20 14:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-19 14:58 [PATCH] sched domains w27 for 2.6.0 Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 11:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-20 14:32 ` Nick Piggin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox