[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150720000808.GF3956@byungchulpark-X58A-UD3R>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:08:08 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched: modify how to compute a slice and check a
preemptability
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 01:15:09PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 06:11:00PM +0900, byungchul.park@....com wrote:
> > doesn't it make sense?
>
> No, people have already given you all kinds of reasons why this isn't a
i feel sorry. but all kinds?. i got only a reason, that is, latency problem.
so i already mentioned both of two cases, because of the reason people told
me. furthermore, nobody gave me a reason why the code should use local cfs's
nr_running to get period at all.
> good change. It is also a very invasive change and you have no
> performance numbers one way or another.
>
> I'm going to fully ignore this thread from now on.
sorry for bothering you.
> --
> 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/
--
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