On Saturday 25 March 2006 00:02, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 23:34 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > I feel this discussion may degenerate beyond this point. Should we say to
> > agree to disagree at this point? I don't like these changes.
>
> Why should it degenerate? You express your concerns, I answer them.
> You don't have to agree with me, and I don't have to agree with you.
> That's no reason for the discussion to degenerate.
By degenerate I mean get stuck in an endless loop. I don't have the energy for
cyclical discussions where no conclusive endpoint can ever be reached. That
is the nature of what we're discussing. Everything is some sort of compromise
and you're moving one set of compromises for another which means this can be
debated forever without a right or wrong.
The merits of throttling seem obvious with a sliding scale between
interactivity and fairness. These other changes, to me, do not. On the
interactivity side I only have interbench for hard data, and it is showing me
regressions consistent with my concerns from these other "cleanups". You'll
trade some other advantage for these and we'll repeat the discussion all over
again. Rinse and repeat.
Cheers,
Con
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
