Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:06:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:05:43 -0500 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:10248 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 13:05:40 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:05:21 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: george anzinger Cc: Nathan , Subject: Re: [patch] O(1) scheduler, 2.4.17-B0, 2.5.2-pre8-B0. In-Reply-To: <3C3B2429.6DFA0EAA@mvista.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, george anzinger wrote: > Nathan wrote: > > > > Out of sheer curiosity (and this might be a stupid question), is there > > any effort to make the following lines of development all work together: > > RML's preempt-kernel and lock-break (and netdev, but that doesn't touch > > the other stuff), Rick's rmap VM, and the O(1) scheduler? If so, is it > No, not in concept. Just that they collide in a couple of places and > need a bit of sorting out. Give us a moment. I'm adding low latency reschedule points to page_launder_zone() and refill_inactive_zone() right now ;) regards, Rik -- Shortwave goes a long way: irc.starchat.net #swl http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/