Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> > know of any other reports then please let me know!)
> 
> There was Caglar Onur too but he said he will redo all the tests. 
> [...]

well, Caglar said CFSv7 works as well as CFSv6 in his latest tests and 
that he'll redo all the tests to re-verify his original regression 
report :)

> In fact, what I'd like to see in 2.6.22 is something better for 
> everybody and with *no* regression, even if it's not perfect.
>
> I had the feeling that SD matched that goal right now, [...]

curious, which are the reports where in your opinion CFS behaves worse 
than vanilla? There were two audio skipping reports against CFS, the 
most serious one got resolved and i hope the other one has been resolved 
by the same fix as well. (i'm still waiting for feedback on that one)

> [...] except for Mike who has not tested recent versions. [...]

actually, dont discount Mark Lord's test results either. And it might be 
a good idea for Mike to re-test SD 0.46?

	Ingo
-
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/