On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Jain Priyanka-B32167 wrote: > Dear Clark, > > Its along time that since I have send patches for cyclicload. > I can see patch for cyclicload integrated into work branch on rt-test git tree. > Did you have any feedback on its working. > > Also I have made some improvements on it. Should I send the next version of the cyclicload patch or a new patch for the changes based on the 'work' branch code. > > Regards > Priyanka > > ------------->o SNIP Personally I think you should send the next version of the new patch, and not based on Clark's work branch. (a working branch is just that, a working place to store patches, no guarantees) I think I should warn you that we have been discussing how difficult it is to make an artifical load. I worry that your program just adds a thread or threads spinning at another prio level, (which you can do already with cyclictest) but not adding any real load. I wouldn't like for you to do a lot of work only to have it ultimately rejected. Why don't you submit the next version of your work, and then perhaps talk a little more about what you intend to do, and see what other people on the mailing list here think about that. Thanks John Kacur -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
