On Monday 16 April 2007 12:28, Nick Piggin wrote: > So, on to something productive, we have 3 candidates for a new scheduler so > far. How do we decide which way to go? (and yes, I still think switchable > schedulers is wrong and a copout) This is one area where it is virtually > impossible to discount any decent design on correctness/performance/etc. > and even testing in -mm isn't really enough.
We're in agreement! YAY! Actually this is simpler than that. I'm taking SD out of the picture. It has served it's purpose of proving that we need to seriously address all the scheduling issues and did more than a half decent job at it. Unfortunately I also cannot sit around supporting it forever by myself. My own life is more important, so consider SD not even running the race any more. I'm off to continue maintaining permanent-out-of-tree leisurely code at my own pace. What's more is, I think I'll just stick to staircase Gen I version blah and shelve SD and try to have fond memories of SD as an intellectual prompting exercise only. -- -ck - 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/
