On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 10:39:28AM -0300, Carlos Carvalho wrote: >That's a pity. What's more important however is that this misfeature >of the scheduler should be corrected ASAP. The nice control is a >traditional UNIX characteristic and it should have higher priority in >the patch inclusion queue than other scheduler improvements. Linux is not a traditional unix, but it doesn't mean the support shouldn't exist. My suggestion is that whoever broke the interface, rendering con's patch which mingo accepted useless, merge the patch. Thanks! -- mjt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: [PATCH] implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- From: [email protected] (Markus Törnqvist)
- Re: [ck] Re: [PATCH] implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- From: [email protected] (Carlos Carvalho)
- [SMP NICE] [PATCH 1/2] SCHED: Implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- From: Con Kolivas <[email protected]>
- Re: [SMP NICE] [PATCH] SCHED: Implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- From: Con Kolivas <[email protected]>
- Re: [SMP NICE] [PATCH] SCHED: Implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- From: [email protected] (Carlos Carvalho)
- Re: [PATCH] implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] fix race in mark_mounts_for_expiry()
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] fix race in mark_mounts_for_expiry()
- Previous by thread: Re: [SMP NICE] [PATCH] SCHED: Implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- Next by thread: Re: [SMP NICE] [PATCH] SCHED: Implement nice support across physical cpus on SMP
- Index(es):
 |