Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933977AbXEGNuy (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2007 09:50:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933860AbXEGNux (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2007 09:50:53 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.176]:22283 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933826AbXEGNuw (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2007 09:50:52 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cb+ND5i8TpbMQl+tZVKZwl8KurdFhYr2F4C0Blhy9fkkMm1NfSuU1vZuEDMl7Gm9mDwjZcBOLmwDCWSqbGNrcJiZoTKlYMRYehtT4hZFUOCPkRIQ0yjveyDLsS/2PeaBYoGyXcBn0Q+d94cjE/tCaoE/y4OEOb+vO82SY/0XgyU= Message-ID: <170fa0d20705070650g47ede2b6q9d1ad899d55ed57f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 09:50:52 -0400 From: "Mike Snitzer" To: "Daniel Phillips" Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v9 Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Linus Torvalds" , "Andrew Morton" , "Con Kolivas" , "Nick Piggin" , "Mike Galbraith" , "Arjan van de Ven" , "Peter Williams" , "Thomas Gleixner" , caglar@pardus.org.tr, "Willy Tarreau" , "Gene Heskett" , "Mark Lord" , buddabrod , "Balbir Singh" In-Reply-To: <4d47a5d10705070302k3f081074k89f0122cee7ae2e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070503140911.GA21916@elte.hu> <4d47a5d10705070302k3f081074k89f0122cee7ae2e@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2071 Lines: 46 On 5/7/07, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > I just thought I would mention this, because it is certainly on my > mind. I can't help > wondering if other folks are also concerned about this. The thing is, > why don't you > just send your patches to Con who got this whole ball rolling and did a bunch of > great work, proving beyond any reasonable doubt that he is capable of > maintaining > this subsystem, whatever algorithm is finally adopted? Are you worried that Con > might steal your thunder? That somehow the scheduler is yours alone? That you > might be perceived as less of a genius if somebody else gets credit > for their good > work? NIH? > > My perception is that you barged in to take over just when Con got things moving > after the scheduler sat and rotted for several years. If that is in > any way accurate, > then shame on you. Daniel, I can't hold a candle to your abilities and I respect your talents and Linux contributions but what are your motives with this flame? I think injecting such uninformed/speculative negativity is an awkward and misplaced distraction. If you look at the archives there was a flurry of (sometimes heated) discussion between Con and Ingo. They seemed to bury the hatchet and get back to critical discussion and analysis of CFS et al. Maybe I'm naive and/or missing something but Ingo doesn't seem to be the glory whore type. He clearly has a strong interest in improving Linux and brings his unique abilities to bear on very complex Linux subsystems. We should be grateful that he has elected to dedicate so much time to improving the CPU scheduler. Ingo has injected new momentum and innovation, yes he leveraged Con's work. But to be clear: he did so in an open forum and has engaged Con and the rest of LKML the entire time. Mike - 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/