|| ||Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
|| ||Peter Zijlstra <peterz-AT-infradead.org> |
|| ||Re: [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running |
|| ||Sat, 11 Sep 2010 12:21:06 -0700|
|| ||Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-AT-efficios.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>,
Tony Lindgren <tony-AT-atomide.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault-AT-gmx.de>|
|| ||Article, Thread
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Not at all charmed, this look like random changes without conceptual
I wish people actually looked at the _numbers_ and reacted to them,
rather than argue theory.
Guys, we have cases of bad latency under load. That's a pretty
undeniable fact. Arguing against a patch because of some theoretical
issue without at all even acknowledging the latency improvements is, I
think, really bad form.
So please. Acknowledge the latency issue. And come up with better
patches, rather than just shoot down alternatives. Because if the
answer is just NAK with no alternative, then that answer is worthless.
to post comments)