Re: [PATCH] Nick's scheduler policy

[Randy.Dunlap]

> Hi,
> Patch against 2.6.0-test4. It fixes a lot of problems here vs
> previous versions. There aren't really any open issues for me, so
> testers would be welcome.
>
...
>
> On the other hand, I expect the best cases and maybe most usual cases would
> be better on Con's... and Con might have since done some work in the latency
> area.

Has anyone developed a (run-time) scheduler [policy] selector, via
sysctl or sysfs, so that different kernel builds aren't required?

I know that I have heard discussions of this previously.

~Randy



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/