Re: NUMA scheduler BK tree
Michael Hohnbaum (hohnbaum@us.ibm.com)
06 Nov 2002 10:10:42 -0800
On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 08:34, Erich Focht wrote:
> Michael, Martin,
>
> in order to make it easier to keep up with the main Linux tree I've
> set up a bitkeeper repository with our NUMA scheduler at
> bk://numa-ef.bkbits.net/numa-sched
> (Web view: http://numa-ef.bkbits.net/)
> This used to contain my node affine NUMA scheduler, I'll add extra
> trees when the additional patches for that are tested on top of our
> NUMA scheduler.
>
> Is it ok for you to have it this way or would you prefer having the
> core and the initial load balancer separate?
>
> The tree is currently in sync with bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.5 and
> I'll try to keep so.
Erich,
This is fine with me. Can't the core changes and and load
balancer be maintained as separate changesets within the bk
tree?
Michael
> Regards,
> Erich
--
Michael Hohnbaum 503-578-5486
hohnbaum@us.ibm.com T/L 775-5486
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/