Re: 2.6.13-rc3-mm1 (ckrm)

[Gerrit Huizenga <gh@us.ibm.com>]

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:06:14 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Paul Jackson wrote:
> > Matthew wrote:
> > 
> >>I don't see the large ifdefs you're referring to in -mm's
> >>kernel/sched.c.
> > 
> > 
> > Perhaps someone who knows CKRM better than I can explain why the CKRM
> > version in some SuSE releases based on 2.6.5 kernels has substantial
> > code and some large ifdef's in sched.c, but the CKRM in *-mm doesn't.
> > Or perhaps I'm confused.  There's a good chance that this represents
> > ongoing improvements that CKRM is making to reduce their footprint
> > in core kernel code.  Or perhaps there is a more sophisticated cpu
> > controller in the SuSE kernel.
> 
> As there is NO CKRM cpu controller in 2.6.13-rc3-mm1 (that I can see) 
> the one in 2.6.5 is certainly more sophisticated :-).  So the reason 
> that the considerable mangling of sched.c evident in SuSE's 2.6.5 kernel 
> source is not present is that the cpu controller is not included in 
> these patches.
 
 Yeah - I don't really consider the current CPU controller code something
 ready for consideration yet for mainline merging.  That doesn't mean
 we don't want a CPU controller for CKRM - just that what we have
 doesn't integrate cleanly/nicely with mainline.

> I imagine that the cpu controller is missing from this version of CKRM 
> because the bugs introduced to the cpu controller during upgrading from 
> 2.6.5 to 2.6.10 version have not yet been resolved.

 I don't know what bugs you are referring to here.  I don't think we
 have any open defects with SuSE on the CPU scheduler in their releases.
 And that is not at all related to the reason for not having a CPU
 controller in the current patch set.

gerrit
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/