From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 26 06:55:14 2004 Return-Path: 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 460FD16A4CE; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:55:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mindfields.energyhq.es.eu.org (73.Red-213-97-200.pooles.rima-tde.net [213.97.200.73]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329AE43D41; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:55:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org) Received: from scienide.energyhq.es.eu.org (scienide.energyhq.es.eu.org [192.168.100.1]) by mindfields.energyhq.es.eu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AD5F23574E; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:55:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:56:27 +0200 From: Miguel Mendez To: Scott Long Message-Id: <20041026085627.008f8f7e.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <417DB5E1.7000308@freebsd.org> References: <417DB5E1.7000308@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12-gtk2-20040918 (GTK+ 2.4.9; i386-portbld-freebsd5.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Tue__26_Oct_2004_08_56_27_+0200_sKcQ86UFQwQ6xyfF" cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: developers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: ULE off in 5.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:55:14 -0000 --Signature=_Tue__26_Oct_2004_08_56_27_+0200_sKcQ86UFQwQ6xyfF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:26:41 -0600 Scott Long wrote: > A lot of poeple have noted recently that a lot of bug reports are > coming in with strange symptoms, and only after a lot of detective > work does it turn out that the submitter is using the ULE scheduler. What are the short term plans for ULE? I understand turning it off for RELENG_5, so I take it will be tested in HEAD? ULE has many nice features and it would be a shame that it wasn't tested well enough so that bugs can eventually be fixed. > out and not compile at all for RELENG_5 and RELENG_5_3. The time > spent debugging ULE-induced problems is causing way too much lost > time, and we need to focus on debugging the supported configurations, > not the unsupported ones. But it has to be tested at some point in time, else it will be in limbo state for ever. Maybe a note in UPDATING explainning the situation would be convenient so people willing to devote time to test and help fix ULE can do so. Cheers, -- Miguel Mendez http://www.energyhq.es.eu.org PGP Key: 0xDC8514F1 Note: All HTML mail goes to /dev/null --Signature=_Tue__26_Oct_2004_08_56_27_+0200_sKcQ86UFQwQ6xyfF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBffUenLctrNyFFPERAl47AKC9r46x6/MXFEyJolPk88ZrqiFnHQCgrt+f fa0uLVABT5jUvHtgiUk31Q0= =Wb3o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__26_Oct_2004_08_56_27_+0200_sKcQ86UFQwQ6xyfF--