Matt Helsley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > (btw, using the term "class" to identify a group of tasks isn't very > > comfortable - it's an instance, not a class...) > > Yes, I can see how this would be uncomfortable. How about replacing > "class" with "resource group"? Much more comfortable, thanks ;) - 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/
- References:
- [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: [email protected]
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Chandra Seetharaman <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Chandra Seetharaman <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- From: Matt Helsley <[email protected]>
- [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] kbuild: Fix "make xconfig" failure in 2.4.33-pre2
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Make ACPI button driver an input device
- Previous by thread: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- Next by thread: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] [PATCH 00/12] CKRM after a major overhaul
- Index(es):
 |