From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757486AbXGaJ5z (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:57:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753685AbXGaJ5s (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:57:48 -0400 Received: from adsl-69-232-92-238.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net ([69.232.92.238]:37847 "EHLO gnuppy.monkey.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753052AbXGaJ5r (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:57:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:57:23 -0700 To: Carlo Florendo Cc: Martin Steigerwald , ck@vds.kolivas.org, Satyam Sharma , Sam Ravnborg , Linus Torvalds , Jan Engelhardt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Bill Huey (hui)" Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Linus 2.6.23-rc1 Message-ID: <20070731095723.GH32582@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <200707292023.36555.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <200707292118.45484.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <46AE8D25.20602@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46AE8D25.20602@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) From: Bill Huey (hui) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 09:15:17AM +0800, Carlo Florendo wrote: > And I think you are digressing from the main issue, which is the empirical > comparison of SD vs. CFS and to determine which is best. The root of all > the scheduler fuss was the emotional reaction of SD's author on why his > scheduler began to be compared with CFS. Legitimate emotional reaction for being locked out of the development process. There's a very human aspect to this, yes, a negative human aspect that pervade Linux kernel development and is overly defensive and protective of new ideas. > We obviously all saw how the particular authors tried to address the > issues. Ingo tried to address all concerns while Con simply ranted about > his scheduler being better. If this is what you think about being a bit > more human, then I think that this has no place in the lkml. That's highly inaccurate and rather disrespect of Con's experience. There as a policy decision made with SD that one person basically didn't like, this person whined like a baby for the a formula bottle and didn't understand how to use "nice" to control this inherent behavior of this scheduler. bill