From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753413AbXDITL1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:11:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753294AbXDITL1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:11:27 -0400 Received: from smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl ([213.51.146.201]:46400 "EHLO smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753413AbXDITL0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:11:26 -0400 Message-ID: <461A8F83.90107@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 21:09:55 +0200 From: Rene Herman User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Mike Galbraith , Gene Heskett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Con Kolivas , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Ten percent test References: <200703290237.38777.kernel@kolivas.org> <200704071423.47790.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <20070407185220.GA31725@elte.hu> <200704071630.25830.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <20070408104125.GB11123@elte.hu> <461939A4.2020305@gmail.com> <1176092598.6355.22.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <461A2E39.8060106@gmail.com> <20070409141516.GB11244@elte.hu> <461A7246.60003@gmail.com> <20070409174803.GA10189@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20070409174803.GA10189@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/09/2007 07:48 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > i didnt say that, in fact my first lkml comment about RSDL on lkml > was the exact opposite, but you SD advocates are _still_ bickering > about (and not accepting) fundamental things like Mike's make -j5 > workload and flagging it as unrealistic, so until there's so much > reality disconnect there's not much chance for this issue to progress > i'm afraid. I suppose I'm lumped in with the "SD advocates" now but you will note that I haven't been bickering about make -j5 loads. You cut away the entire meat of my reply which was all that predictability harping. What I did say about make -j5 loads is that I do not think that they, under all circumstances, on all machines and at all cost, need to perform the same as currently if other situations improve. Do I want heuristics? Sure, I'm just saying the kernel is fundamentally incapable of getting it right all of the time and as such it should provide me with as many opportunities as possible at stepping in. That is, let me understand what it is and is going to be doing and then listen to me. I agree not a lot of progress is to be made if people keep ignoring each other like that but also while SD's author is offline. Let's just shelve it until he's back. Not bury though... Rene.