Peter Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I don't think either of these issues warrant abandoning smpnice. The
> first is highly unlikely to occur on real systems and the second is just
> an example of the patch doing its job (maybe too officiously). I don't
> think users would notice either on real systems.
>
> Even if you pull it from 2.6.16 rather than upgrading it with my patch
> can you please leave both in -mm?
Yes, I have done that. I currently have:
sched-restore-smpnice.patch
sched-modified-nice-support-for-smp-load-balancing.patch
sched-cleanup_task_activated.patch
sched-alter_uninterruptible_sleep_interactivity.patch
sched-make_task_noninteractive_use_sleep_type.patch
sched-dont_decrease_idle_sleep_avg.patch
sched-include_noninteractive_sleep_in_idle_detect.patch
sched-new-sched-domain-for-representing-multi-core.patch
sched-fix-group-power-for-allnodes_domains.patch
-
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]
