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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox