Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757404AbZLLH7h (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:59:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751628AbZLLH7g (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:59:36 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:44097 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751562AbZLLH7f (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:59:35 -0500 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18Okttu8PEOAlBsurnsFamRj8xp4OGwLRSbb4ZUo8 8r/RvEck4X+7ZX Subject: Re: BFS v0.311 CPU scheduler for 2.6.32 From: Mike Galbraith To: Con Kolivas Cc: Christoph Lameter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200912120937.42943.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <200912111124.18118.kernel@kolivas.org> <200912120204.51547.kernel@kolivas.org> <200912120937.42943.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 08:59:39 +0100 Message-Id: <1260604779.6571.28.camel@marge.simson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.62 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1296 Lines: 30 On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 09:37 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:12:58 Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Con Kolivas wrote: > > > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:10:39 Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > Could you make the scheduler build time configurable instead of > > > > replacing the existing one? Embedded folks in particular may love a low > > > > footprint scheduler. > > > > > > It's not a bad idea, but the kernel still needs to be patched either way. > > > To get BFS they'd need to patch the kernel. If they didn't want BFS, they > > > wouldn't patch it in the first place. > > > > BFS would have a chance to be merged as an alternate scheduler for > > specialized situations (such as embedded or desktop use). > > > > Nice idea, but regardless of who else might want that, the mainline > maintainers have already made it clear they do not. Hm. You made it very clear from the onset that BFS was not intended to be a merge candidate. Of course, you're free to change your mind any time you feel like it. -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/