lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 07:26:11 +0100 From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...o.co.il>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, ck@....kolivas.org, Serge Belyshev <belyshev@...ni.sinp.msu.ru>, Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: is RSDL an "unfair" scheduler too? On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 06:24 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Maybe we're all discussing the problem because we have reached the point > where we need two types of schedulers : one for the desktop and one for > the servers. After all, this is already what is proposed with preempt, > it would make sense provided they share the same core and avoid ifdefs > or unused structure members. Maybe adding OPTIONAL unfairness to RSDL > would help some scenarios, but in any case it is important to retain > the default fairness it provides. Bingo. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists