On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 02:41:04AM +0100, Chris Hedley wrote: >> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Ryan Sommers wrote: >>> Are you using PREEMPT with SHED_ULE? Or is this just SHED_ULE without >>> preemption? >> >> I have both SCHED_ULE and PREEMPTION set in my config file, which I've >> included as an attachment "just in case" (please don't laugh at how >> scruffy it's become!) > > Aargh..you'd think people would have got the idea by now that > SCHED_ULE is broken, especially with PREEMPTION! Of course only now have I spotted the 20040702 entry in UPDATING! Anyway, thanks for the helpful replies I've received, turning off PREEMPTION has fixed the problem. I still have ULE configured, which in light of what I've just spotted is perhaps not the best thing to use at the moment, so I'll probably revert to 4BSD for the time being. I suppose the important lesson I've learned is that even if I can't keep up with the list, UPDATING obviously needs to be checked thoroughly whenever I do a cvsup. Thanks again: my machine is now feeling a lot happier. Chris.Received on Wed Oct 20 2004 - 19:49:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:18 UTC