Re: [OKS] O(1) scheduler in 2.4

[Ingo Molnar]

On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote:

> What's the issue? The most popular trees have been using it without
> issue for six months or so, and I know of no cases of bad behaviour.  
> [...]

well, the patch is barely 6 months old. A new scheduler changes the
'heart' of the kernel and something like that should not be done for the
stable branch, especially since it has finally started to converge towards
a state that can be called stable ...

> [...] I know there are people who don't believe in the preempt patch,
> but the new scheduler seems to work better under both desktop and server
> load.

well, the preempt patch is rather for RT-type workloads where milliseconds
matter, which improvements are not a matter of belief, but a matter of
hard latencies. Mere mortals should hardly notice its effects under normal
loads - perhaps a bit more 'snappiness'. But such effects do accumulate
up, and people are seeing visible improvements with combo-patches of
lowlat-lockbreak+preempt+O(1).

	Ingo