Home » Mailing list archives » linux-kernel » 2008 » May » 27

[RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
[view in full thread]
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>
Subject: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN
Date: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 - 4:58 am

I know that this is controversial, for further background please see the
discussion in http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10761

Facts:
- Bugzilla statistics
  (not counting duplicate bugs and bugs closed as INVALID):
  - 6 CPU scheduler regressions reported during 2.6.25-rc
    1 of them still open as of 2.6.26-rc4
  - 6 CPU scheduler regressions reported during 2.6.26-rc until now
    5 of them still open as of 2.6.26-rc4
  - at about half of the CPU scheduler regressions are related to
    group scheduling
- Peter Zijlstra said in Bugzilla bug #10761:
  > Adrian Bunk said:
  > The CPU scheduler is currently regressing horribly often, and half of the
  > regressions are in group scheduling.
  That is because group scheduling is horribly complex and was never
  feature complete - trying to solve that is high on my list of
  priorities.

My opinion:
- features that alter existing kernel functionality should (different
  from drivers for previously not supported hardware) be in a very good
  state before being offered in stable kernels
- Peter is wrong when he thinks that EXPERIMENTAL would somehow hide
  known-problematic features - in practice nearly everyone has to have 
  EXPERIMENTAL enabled (e.g. for some hardware driver)
- group scheduling already has a history of people accidentally enabling 
  it and then running into problems

I therefore suggest this patch to let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN.

Once it is feature complete and then got the usual testing through
-next I'll have no objections against offering it again to users.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>

---
c67cfbbb40895b72760865527dd1949631b1d183 diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
index d9526b5..564deba 100644
--- a/init/Kconfig
+++ b/init/Kconfig
@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ config HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
 
 config GROUP_SCHED
 	bool "Group CPU scheduler"
-	depends on EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on BROKEN
 	default n
 	help
 	  This feature lets CPU scheduler recognize task groups and control CPU

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Messages in current thread:
[RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Adrian Bunk, (Tue May 27, 4:58 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Ingo Molnar, (Tue May 27, 10:22 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Adrian Bunk, (Tue May 27, 1:53 pm)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Mike Galbraith, (Tue May 27, 2:17 pm)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Peter Zijlstra, (Tue May 27, 7:47 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Adrian Bunk, (Tue May 27, 9:08 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue May 27, 1:30 pm)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Adrian Bunk, (Tue May 27, 3:18 pm)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Peter Zijlstra, (Tue May 27, 10:17 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Mike Galbraith, (Tue May 27, 5:47 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Adrian Bunk, (Tue May 27, 6:26 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Mike Galbraith, (Tue May 27, 7:27 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Alan Cox, (Tue May 27, 6:28 am)
Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let GROUP_SCHED depend on BROKEN, Mike Galbraith, (Tue May 27, 6:04 am)