Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23

On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 04:23 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,

Hi,

> The new scheduler does _a_lot_ of heavy 64 bit calculations without any 
> attempt to scale that down a little...

See prio_to_weight[], prio_to_wmult[] and sysctl_sched_stat_granularity.
Perhaps more can be done, but "without any attempt..." isn't accurate.

	-Mike

-
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: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>

• References:
  • -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
  • Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
    • From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] try parent numa_node at first before using default
• Next by Date: Re: CPUFreq compilation failure with current GIT.
• Previous by thread: Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
• Next by thread: Re: x86 status was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23
• 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]