Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Apr 2003 03:08:27 -0400 (EDT) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] HT scheduler, sched-2.5.68-A9 |
| |
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Dave Jones wrote:
> Maybe this would be better resolved at runtime ? With the above patch, > you'd need three seperate kernel images to run optimally on a system in > each of the cases. The 'vendor kernel' scenario here looks ugly to me.
it's not a problem - vendors enable it and that's all. But the majority of SMP systems does not need a shared runqueue, so the associated overhead (which, while small, is nonzero) can be avoided.
> Dumping all this into the config system seems to be the wrong direction > IMHO. The myriad of runtime knobs in the scheduler already is bad > enough, without introducing compile time ones as well.
what runtime knobs? I've avoided as many of them as possible.
Ingo
- 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/
| |