Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:43:43 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE status Message-ID: <20050208144343.5bd6dd76@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <200502081333.08964.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> References: <Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081306440.28295@ux11.ltcm.net> <200502081333.08964.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:33:04 +0100 Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> wrote: > On Tuesday, 8. February 2005 13:07, Mipam wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I saw several changes to sched_ule.c in the 5 stable branch. > > Beneath is one of them: > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/2005-February/039863.html > > > > Is the ULE scheduler still far from stable in RELENG_5 or not? > > You can now compile a kernel with options SCHED_ULE again. How well it works > is for yourself to determine :-) (I've been using it on my UP machine here > since yesterday only). Could you tell us again after a week ? There used to be a panic when using rtprio to raise the priority of a running process, do you know if it's fix ? -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050208144343.5bd6dd76>