[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0908261136590.9933@gentwo.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:41:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: raz ben yehuda <raziebe@...il.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, riel@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu,
andrew motron <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
wiseman@...s.biu.ac.il, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: THE OFFLINE SCHEDULER
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Why waste a whole cpu for something that could be done by part of one?
Because of latency and performance requirements
> You're bound to have interaction between the core os and these
> partitions you want, non of it different from how threads in the kernel
> would interact, other than that you're going to re-invent everything
> already present in the kernel.
The kernel interactions can be done while running on another (not
isolated) cpu.
> You don't, you make things more complex by introducing duplicate
> functionality.
The functionality does not exist. This is about new features.
> If you think the kernel is too fat and does superfluous things for your
> needs, help trim it.
Mind boogling nonsense. Please stop fantasizing and trolling.
--
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