Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2

On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:04:35 +0300, Al Boldi said:

> The important part here is 'unless there is a way to relate them', at which 
> point UP and MP should be conceptually the same, while possibly differing in 
> the implementation details.

Oh, OK. I think we're actually in agreement, just using different terms for
the same thing - what you were considering multiple related queues, I'd
consider one unified queue with subqueuing of some sort.. ;)

Attachment: pgpxwKakFdzSZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

---

• References:
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
    • From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
    • From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
    • From: Al Boldi <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion
• Next by Date: Re: VIA x86-64 bootlogs needed
• Previous by thread: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.4 for 2.6.18-rc2
• Next by thread: Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org
• 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]