Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S275203AbRJAQTv>; Mon, 1 Oct 2001 12:19:51 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S275208AbRJAQTl>; Mon, 1 Oct 2001 12:19:41 -0400
Received: from oe30.law11.hotmail.com ([64.4.16.87]:53259 "EHLO hotmail.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S275203AbRJAQT3>;
	Mon, 1 Oct 2001 12:19:29 -0400
X-Originating-IP: [12.19.166.64]
From: "Dan Mann" <daniel_b_mann@hotmail.com>
To: "Kernel List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: QNX Scheduler patch
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 12:19:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <OE309IcVux1Zcn8TtEv00006b70@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2001 16:19:52.0659 (UTC) FILETIME=[E68B5230:01C14A94]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Can anyone tell me about experience with the QNX scheduler patch done way
back for kernel 2.0.31?  I've been wanting to try it on a 2.4 series kernel
(I'm looking for best possible interactive performance under X), and I want
to know if it is worth porting to the 2.4 line.

Thanks,

Dan
-
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/