Re: [Patch] sched: mc/smt power savings sched policy

On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 09:59:08AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> This MC code is a maze of #ifdefs within functions and getting harder to 
> follow with each subsequent patch. Can we not deviate so much from kernel 
> style?

build_sched_domains() originally was not designed with this many sched
domains in mind.. I can take a look at cleaning up of the sched domains
setup..

thanks,
suresh
-
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:
  • [Patch] sched: mc/smt power savings sched policy
    • From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [Patch] sched: mc/smt power savings sched policy
    • From: Con Kolivas <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] fix missing hdlc symbols for synclink drivers
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc5 0/8] Kernel memory leak detector 0.5
• Previous by thread: Re: [Patch] sched: mc/smt power savings sched policy
• Next by thread: Re: [Patch] sched: mc/smt power savings sched policy
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]