On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 04:18:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:Here's the problem, *a lot* of folks can do scheduler development in and outside community, so what's with exclusive-only attitude towards the scheduler ? There's sufficient effort coming from folks working on CFS from many sources so how's sched-plugin a *threat* to stock kernel scheduler development if it gets to the main tree as the default compile option ?? Those are the core question that Con brought in the APC article, folks are angry because and nobody central to the current Linux has address this and instead focused on a single narrow set of technical issues to justify a particular set of actions. I mean, I'm not the only that has said this so there has to be some kind of truth behind it. bill -
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Andy Whitcroft | clam |
| Ingo Molnar | [patch] paravirt: VDSO page is essential |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Lovich, Vitali | RE: [PATCH] Packet socket: mmapped IO: PACKET_TX_RING |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
