On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:41:12 -0400
Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@canonical.com> wrote:
There was useful information in the [patch 0/1] email, such as the
offending commit ID. If possible, it's best to avoid the [patch 0/n]
thing altogether - that information either has to be moved into the
[patch 1/n] changelog by someone (ie: me), or it just gets ommitted and
lost.
That seems a sensible way to avoid the gross-looking "10 ticks" thing.
What was the reason for "update the avenrun load estimates 10 ticks
after the CPUs have updated calc_load_tasks"? Can we do something
smarter there to fix this?
The global `deferred' is unfortunate from a design and possibly
scalability POV. Can it be moved into the `struct rq'? That way it
can become a plain old `unsigned long', too.
--