Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:49:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:49:57 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:24803 "HELO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:49:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 20:49:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Bill Davidsen Cc: Linux-Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [OKS] O(1) scheduler in 2.4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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 Content-Length: 1251 Lines: 30 On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote: > What's the issue? The most popular trees have been using it without > issue for six months or so, and I know of no cases of bad behaviour. > [...] well, the patch is barely 6 months old. A new scheduler changes the 'heart' of the kernel and something like that should not be done for the stable branch, especially since it has finally started to converge towards a state that can be called stable ... > [...] I know there are people who don't believe in the preempt patch, > but the new scheduler seems to work better under both desktop and server > load. well, the preempt patch is rather for RT-type workloads where milliseconds matter, which improvements are not a matter of belief, but a matter of hard latencies. Mere mortals should hardly notice its effects under normal loads - perhaps a bit more 'snappiness'. But such effects do accumulate up, and people are seeing visible improvements with combo-patches of lowlat-lockbreak+preempt+O(1). Ingo - 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/