On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky <sas...@voltaire.com> wrote: > On 06:58 Wed 02 Jun , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> >> I had started with an algorithm along these lines but evolved towards >> the proposed one based on CPU utilization. An algorithm along the >> lines of the above wastes CPU (when "idling" and other times) which >> significantly impacts any other apps running. > > So what are you saying? To skip this patch until better implementation?
I'm saying that I think the approach proposed in the original patch is better as it doesn't waste CPU although it's more complex. Maybe there's something in the middle (less than my patch but doesn't waste CPU as the "simplest" approach does) but I'm not sure about this right now. -- Hal > Sasha > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
