Re: Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-20 Thread Martin J. Bligh
--Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote (on Saturday, March 19, 2005 14:07:54 -0800): > "Martin J. Bligh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least >> *something* in your tree isn't ... >> >> Kernbench: >>

Re: Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-20 Thread Martin J. Bligh
--Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (on Saturday, March 19, 2005 14:07:54 -0800): Martin J. Bligh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least *something* in your tree isn't ... Kernbench: Elapsed

Re: Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-19 Thread Andrew Morton
"Martin J. Bligh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least > *something* in your tree isn't ... > > Kernbench: > ElapsedSystem User CPU > elm3b67 2.6.11 50.24

Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-19 Thread Martin J. Bligh
I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least *something* in your tree isn't ... Kernbench: ElapsedSystem User CPU elm3b67 2.6.11 50.24146.60 1117.61 2516.67 elm3b67 2.6.11-mm1

Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-19 Thread Martin J. Bligh
I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least *something* in your tree isn't ... Kernbench: ElapsedSystem User CPU elm3b67 2.6.11 50.24146.60 1117.61 2516.67 elm3b67 2.6.11-mm1

Re: Scheduling changes in -mm tree

2005-03-19 Thread Andrew Morton
Martin J. Bligh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least *something* in your tree isn't ... Kernbench: ElapsedSystem User CPU elm3b67 2.6.11 50.24146.60