From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep  7 21:14:58 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6979216A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue,  7 Sep 2004 21:14:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net
	[209.226.175.188])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF05F43D5D
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue,  7 Sep 2004 21:14:57 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from dashevil@sympatico.ca)
Received: from [192.168.2.32] ([65.93.56.19]) by tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net
	ESMTP
	<20040907211454.FKFN7925.tomts25-srv.bellnexxia.net@[192.168.2.32]>;
	Tue, 7 Sep 2004 17:14:54 -0400
From: Chris Laverdure <dashevil@sympatico.ca>
To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <413E20FC.80801@samsco.org>
References: <413E20FC.80801@samsco.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1094577291.56128.1.camel@elemental.DashEvil>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 17:14:52 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Scheduler change
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 21:14:58 -0000

On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 20:58, Scott Long wrote:
> All,
> 
> In the interest of getting RELENG_5 stable and ready for 5.3, we are
> going to switch the scheduler in 6-CURRENT from SCHED_ULE to SCHED_4BSD.
> Tests are showing that the 4BSD is a bit more stable under load than
> ULE, and is a LOT morestable than ULE with PREEMPTION enabled.  This
> does not mean that ULE is being removed or that we have lost confidence
> in the direction and features of ULE.  By changing this we can focus on
> stability for the rest of the RELENG_5 cycle.  I'd encourage anyone who
> is interested in the ULE scheduler to talk to Julian Elischer and Jeff
> Roberson about what needs to be done with it.  Once 5.3 is released we
> can look at switching 6-CURRENT back to ULE if it makes sense.
> 
> Scott

Wouldn't it make sense to have them list what needs to be done with it
somewhere?