Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:05:36AM +0200, David Coppa wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best Didn't get this patch. Is it me or the patch is missing? The patch was the message my mail was in reply to. There's no Patch 2/5 subject line because I forgot to change that after sending out Patch 1/5. Can you resend it, please? I'm confused... TIA, David
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
On 2012/10/15 16:18, David Coppa wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:05:36AM +0200, David Coppa wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best Didn't get this patch. Is it me or the patch is missing? The patch was the message my mail was in reply to. There's no Patch 2/5 subject line because I forgot to change that after sending out Patch 1/5. Can you resend it, please? I'm confused... TIA, David Best to send the diff, with the accompanying text, in the same email, and make sure they still all apply, I tried testing some of these but didn't manage to get them to apply (either some conflicting change, or they were in the wrong order and stacked up on top of each other or something).
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
On Monday 15 October 2012, Stuart Henderson wrote: Best to send the diff, with the accompanying text, in the same email, and make sure they still all apply, I tried testing some of these but didn't manage to get them to apply (either some conflicting change, or they were in the wrong order and stacked up on top of each other or something). As you mentioned using git in another mail, I would recommend to use git's format-patch to create the mails. Maybe with the --no-prefix option, because that seems to be the preferred patch format here. Also, interactive rebase (git rebase -i) is nice for adjusting patches and commit messages (in case you didn't know that one). Cheers, Stefan
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best Didn't get this patch. Is it me or the patch is missing?
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:05:36AM +0200, David Coppa wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best Didn't get this patch. Is it me or the patch is missing? The patch was the message my mail was in reply to. There's no Patch 2/5 subject line because I forgot to change that after sending out Patch 1/5. -- Gregor Best
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
Gregor you would perhaps get better feedback if it were easier to discern where your patches are and what each one is doing. If you can't be inclined to keep the subjects matching the diffs and are sending stuff out with subjects like scheduler improvement diff X instead of something like reduce time slice length by 50% it makes it a lot more effort for someone to read and test. On Oct 14, 2012 9:01 AM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:05:36AM +0200, David Coppa wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Gregor Best g...@ring0.de wrote: This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best Didn't get this patch. Is it me or the patch is missing? The patch was the message my mail was in reply to. There's no Patch 2/5 subject line because I forgot to change that after sending out Patch 1/5. -- Gregor Best
Re: Scheduler improvements, take 1001, Patch 2/5
This patch simply halves the timeslice processes get until they are preempted. This patch is standalone and the rest of the patches does not depend on it, but I figured I'd throw it in anyway. -- Gregor Best
