* Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The test scenario was one any desktop user might do with every
> expectation responsiveness of the interactive application remain
> intact. I understand the concepts here Con, and I'm not knocking your
> scheduler. I find it to be a step forward on the one hand, but a step
> backward on the other.
ok, then that step backward needs to be fixed.
> > We are getting good interactive response with a fair scheduler yet
> > you seem intent on overloading it to find fault with it.
>
> I'm not trying to find fault, I'm TESTING AND REPORTING. Was.
Con, could you please take Mike's report of this regression seriously
and address it? Thanks,
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
