Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Jul 2007 09:04 UTC
"People who think SD was 'perfect' were simply ignoring reality," Linus Torvalds began in a succinct explanation as to why he chose the CFS scheduler written by Ingo Molnar instead of the SD scheduler written by Con Kolivas. He continued, "sadly, that seemed to include Con too, which was one of the main reasons that I never [entertained] the notion of merging SD for very long at all: Con ended up arguing against people who reported problems, rather than trying to work with them." He went on to stress the importance of working toward a solution that is good for everyone, "that was where the SD patches fell down. They didn't have a maintainer that I could trust to actually care about any other issues than his own." Update: OSNews user superstoned pointed us to the other side of the story.
Thread beginning with comment 258902
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-20
I believe Con Kolivas when he says that his patches boost performance on a desktop system, but for the time I have used them I never really felt a huge difference. Maybe they would have if I read his benchmarks first
It sucks to see this kind of arguments happen, but I'm not sure CK had all the right in the world, this time.
Looking forward to 2.6.23