* George Sescher <gesacs@gmail.com> wrote:

quoted text
> On 30/07/07, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > i'd encourage you to do it - in fact i already tried to prod Peter 
> > Williams into doing exactly that ;) The more reality checks a 
> > scheduler has, the better. [ Btw., after the obvious initial merging 
> > trouble it should be much easier to keep SD maintained against 
> > future upstream kernels due to the policy modularity that CFS 
> > introduces. (and which policy-modularity should also help reduce the 
> > size and complexity of the SD patch.) ]
> 
> <chuckle>
> 
> You're advocating plugsched now?

hm, the way you posited this question implies that you see an 
inconsistency in my position or that it surprised you - i cannot explain 
the '<chuckle>' in any other way :) Which bit do you see as inconsistent 
and/or which bit surprised you and why?

        Ingo

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/