[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wg3RDXp2sY9EXA0JD26kdNHHBP4suXyeqJhnL_3yjG2gg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:10:15 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com,
vschneid@...hat.com, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...nel.org, joshdon@...gle.com, brho@...gle.com, pjt@...gle.com,
derkling@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com, dvernet@...a.com,
dschatzberg@...a.com, dskarlat@...cmu.edu, riel@...riel.com,
changwoo@...lia.com, himadrics@...ia.fr, memxor@...il.com,
andrea.righi@...onical.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v6] sched: Implement BPF extensible scheduler class
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 13:56, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> So instead of "solving" this brute force and thereby proliferating the
> non-constructive situation, can you please hold off with that plan to
> merge it as is and give us three month to get this onto a collaborative
> and constructive track?
The thing is, I have seen absolutely _nothing_ in the last 9 months or so.
So to me, "three more months" sounds like just delay.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists