Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6

On Sunday 29 April 2007 20:30, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> As a sidenote: I really wonder if anybody noticed yet, that the whole
> CFS / SD comparison is so ridiculous, that it is not even funny anymore.
> CFS modifies the scheduler and nothing else, SD fiddles all over the
> kernel in interesting ways.

This is a WTF if ever I saw one.

-- 
-ck
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
    • From: Bill Huey (hui) <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
    • From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
    • From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [PATCH] [25/48] x86_64: Introduce load_TLS to the "for" loop.
• Next by Date: [PATCH] [47/48] x86_64: Fix "Section mismatch" compile warning
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6
• 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]