Am Samstag 28 Juli 2007 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
quoted text
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Kasper Sandberg wrote:
> > Im still not so keen about this, Ingo never did get CFS to match SD
> > in smoothness for 3d applications, where my test subjects are
> > quake(s), world of warcraft via wine, unreal tournament 2004. And
> > this is despite many patches he sent me to try and tweak it.

[...]

quoted text
> I'm happy that SD was perfect for you. It wasn't for others, and it had
> nobody who was even interested in trying to solve those issues.

Linus, I seen somethimg *completely* different on the CK mailinglist. Con=20
Koliva worked up to his limits and likely beyond them to fix any and all=20
issues reported. Heck, he maintained that thing out of the kernel tree=20
for a long time and the version number 1.0 does not come from nothing, it=20
has gone through at least 50 iterations.

The only thing I know of where Con did not want to "fix" a problem, was=20
with renicing X, cause he didn't want to introduce a special case in the=20
scheduler, where a simple nice would do the trick. That said I never saw=20
serious problems with X unreniced at all.

So I think your statements here are simply not accurate and also not fair,=
=20
cause I have the impression that you did not look carefully before=20
writing them.

You speak about working together, but now I ask you: Did you ever have a=20
personal word with Con, did you ever tell him that you don't trust that=20
he can maintain the SD scheduler when its mainline? Did you ever outspoke=20
your concerns to *him*?

Granted, from a health point of view and maybe also from looking at how=20
much time a maintainer will be able to spend more time on the scheduler=20
Ingo *may* can do more than Con - if he doesn't do too much else;-). But=20
looking at personal committment actually I saw no difference between Con=20
and Ingo.

So while it may be good that CFS went in from that point of view, the way=20
the decision was made was very suitable to piss off a very talented=20
developer.

Anyway, the decision is done, Con resigned already, he gave up on it. And=20
actually when I read your mail I can understand why he did so[1]. Sure,=20
he is involved as well and I think he felt hurt on some things that in my=20
perception were meant neutral or even supporting and postive, but still I=20
disagree a lot on the tone in LKML and understand exactly why Linux=20
users, Linux desktop users away from it as much as they can. Actually I=20
do not get that as you state in one of your latest interviews that you=20
are actually very interested into the desktop, cause its a very suitable=20
kernel test case[2].

Well I for sure will patch whatever into my kernels that I think should be=
=20
in there for me to have a *pleasant* desktop experience, including, but=20
not limited to, TuxOnIce ;-). Oh, but that might possibly not be mainted=20
nicely enough as well then. (Yes, here is sarcastic irony, lots of it. So=20
no offence intended, Nigel;-)


[1] http://apcmag.com/6735/interview_con_kolivas
[2] http://www.oneopensource.it/interview-linus-torvalds/


Regards,
=2D-=20
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7