Re: RSDL-mm 0.28

[Andrew Morton]

> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 14:59:28 +1100 Con Kolivas <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Bottom line: we've had a _lot_ of problems with the new yield() semantics.
> > We effectively broke back-compatibility by changing its behaviour a lot,
> > and we can't really turn around and blame application developers for that.
> 
> So... I would take it that's a yes for a recommendation with respect to 
> implementing a new yield() ? A new scheduler is as good a time as any to do 
> it.

I guess so.  We'd, err, need to gather Ingo's input ;)

Perhaps a suitable way of doing this would be to characterise then emulate
the 2.4 behaviour.  As long as it turns out to be vaguely sensible.
-
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/