>Having a framework for giving people the choice between different
>solutions usually sounds good in theory, but in practice there's the
>often underestimated high price of people using a different solution
>instead of reporting a problem with one solution or people adding
>features to only one
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 08:56:10AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 10:03:02PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
> >
> > There are various metrics a scheduler may want to optimize for, such as
> > throughput, response time, power consumption, fairness, and so on. Each
> > of these may al
On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 10:03:02PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
>
> There are various metrics a scheduler may want to optimize for, such as
> throughput, response time, power consumption, fairness, and so on. Each
> of these may also be defined differently in different environments. Take
> fairness as
> -Original Message-
> From: Adrian Bunk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 4:46 PM
> To: Li, Tong N
> Cc: Giuseppe Bilotta; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.5.1 for 2.6.22
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2007
On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 10:47:51AM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
> > On Thursday 12 July 2007 00:17, Al Boldi wrote:
> >
> > > Peter Williams wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Probably the last one now that CFS is in the main line :-(.
> > >
> > > What do you mean? A pluggable scheduler framework is indispensible
> On Thursday 12 July 2007 00:17, Al Boldi wrote:
>
> > Peter Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> Probably the last one now that CFS is in the main line :-(.
> >
> > What do you mean? A pluggable scheduler framework is indispensible
even
> in
> > the presence of CFS or SD.
>
> Indeed, and I hope it gets m
6 matches
Mail list logo
