Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fair starvation free interactive cpu scheduler)

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Al Boldi <a1426z@...>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Friday, March 9, 2007 - 8:06 pm

On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Al Boldi wrote:


The point Linus is makeing is that with pluggable schedulers there isn't 
competition between them, the various developer teams would go off in their own 
direction and any drawbacks to their scheduler could be answered with "that's 
not what we are good at, use a different scheduler", with the very real 
possibility that a person could get this answer from ALL schedulers, leaving 
them with nothing good to use.

David Lang
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., William Lee Irwin III, (Fri Mar 9, 9:57 am)
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., David Lang, (Fri Mar 9, 8:06 pm)
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., William Lee Irwin III, (Fri Mar 9, 8:16 pm)
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., William Lee Irwin III, (Sat Mar 10, 2:59 am)
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., William Lee Irwin III, (Sat Mar 10, 3:31 pm)
Re: Pluggable Schedulers (was: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fa..., William Lee Irwin III, (Fri Mar 9, 9:10 pm)