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, 29 Apr 2007 14:00:54 +0200 From: Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk> To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>, caglar@...dus.org.tr, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, Zach Carter <linux@...hcarter.com>, buddabrod <buddabrod@...il.com> Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v6 On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 13:11 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 12:30:54PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: <snip> > Contrarily to most people, I don't see them as competitors. I see SD as > a first step with a low risk of regression, and CFS as an ultimate > solution relying on a more solid framework. > See this is the part i dont understand, what makes CFS the ultimate solution compared to SD? <snip> > > Willy > > - 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