Re: [GIT PULL] x86/urgent fixes for v3.5

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Chen <hi3766691@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Interesting posts, first the "500K scheduler" nonsense now
> > printk nonsense?
> 
> printk nonsense?  You actually read my words wrong(LAUGH!)
> [I m going to quota my post]
>
> * Chen <hi3766691@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Everyone knows that this patch had been unstable. Also, too
> > much code are pushed into printk() with the patch
>
> I mean that too much code are brought with the patch.

The 'Everyone knows that this patch had been unstable' bit is 
the nonsense.

> 500K scheduler is true. 248K(Core.c[MODULAR]) + 
> 148K(fair.c[CFS]) + 47K(rt.c[RT]) = 443K.(Does not include the 
> other source files of scheduler.) It is really a *HUGE* CPU 
> scheduler.[But it doesn't bring much advantages to desktop!!]

You are quite confused. Here's the reply I gave you in the other 
thread:

Only binary code is counted in bytes, source code is counted in 
lines.

20 KLOC for a full-featured CPU scheduler that does everything 
from simple UP scheduling to thousands of CPUs NUMA scheduling, 
cgroups, real-time and more, is entirely reasonable.

As a comparison the VM is 80+ KLOCS, arch/x86/ is 260+ KLOCs, 
networking is 720+ KLOCS and the FS subsystem is over 1 million 
lines of code.

The scheduler is in fact one of the smaller subsystems.

Thanks,

	Ingo