Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:12:46 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Minor scheduler fix to get rid of skipping in xmms |
| |
Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > >ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-test4/2.6.0-test4-mm6/broken-out/sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch > > > This patch improves specjjb over test5 and has no real effect on any of > kernbench, volanomark or specsdet.
Fine, it's a good fix.
> > > >and if you have time, also test5 plus sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch plus > > > >ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-test4/2.6.0-test4-mm6/broken-out/sched-balance-fix-2.6.0-test3-mm3-A0.patch > > > > > This patch degrades both specjbb and volanomark, and to a lesser degree > specsdet
ok. And just confirming: that was test5 plus sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch plus sched-balance-fix-2.6.0-test3-mm3-A0.patch?
I didn't expect a regression from sched-balance-fix.
> >What I'm afraid of is that those patches will yield improved results over > >test5, and that adding > > > >ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-test4/2.6.0-test4-mm6/broken-out/sched-2.6.0-test2-mm2-A3.patch > > > I tried adding this patch to stock test5 and it failed to apply > cleanly. I have not had a chance to look at why. Did you mean for this > to be applied by itself, or was this supposed to go on top of one of the > other patches?
Yes, it applies on top of the other two patches.
Thanks for working on this: it's pretty important right now.
- 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/
| |