Linus Torvalds wrote: > I was very happy to see the "try this patch" email from Al Boldi - not > because I think that patch per se was necessarily the right fix (I have no > idea),
Well, it wasn't really meant as a fix, but rather to point out that interactivity boosting is possible with RSDL. It probably needs a lot more work, but just this one-liner gives an unbelievable ia boost. > but simply because I think that's the kind of mindset we need to have. Thanks. > Not a lot of people really *like* the old scheduler, but it's been tweaked > over the years to try to avoid some nasty behaviour. I'm really hoping > that RSDL would be a lot better (and by all accounts it has the potential > for that), but I think it's totally naïve to expect that it won't need > some tweaking too. Aside from ia boosting, I think fixed latencies per nice levels may be desirable, when physically possible, to allow for more deterministic scheduling. > So I'll happily still merge RSDL right after 2.6.21 (and it won't even be > a config option - if we want to make it good, we need to make sure > *everybody* tests it), but what I want to see is that "can do" spirit wrt > tweaking for issues that come up. > > Because let's face it - nothing is ever perfect. Even a really nice > conceptual idea always ends up hitting the "but in real life, things are > ugly and complex, and we've depended on behaviour X in the past and can't > change it, so we need some tweaking for problem Y". > > And everything is totally fixable - at least as long as people are willing > to! Agreed. Thanks! -- Al - 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/