Matthrew wrote:
> My (completely uninformed) guess is that the CKRM folks thought it would
> be extremely unlikely to be able to get the 'vrm' into the kernel
> without something to use it.
I'd guess the same thing.
> The 'vrm' and the fair share scheduler, should be
> logically separate pieces of code, though.
I agree - should be.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.650.933.1373
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
_______________________________________________
ckrm-tech mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
