On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves <lclaudio@uudg.org> wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 02:18:51PM +0530, Subrata Modak wrote:
| > >
| >
| > Are you going to post a new patch against this backdrop ?
| >
|
| Is new patch forthcoming ?
|
| Regards--
| Subrata

Subrata, sorry for the delay in answering your email.

After Chirag's message I started testing with the SVN codebase.
Yesterday I saw a few anomalous time readings in one test run but
as I was not able to reproduce it, I understand it was something
trasient. I repeated the tests in the machines I used to see busy_work_ms()
not performing well in the past.

I have been using the stable tarball from February plus a few patches and I
had seen this problem there. As the code for busy_work has not changed much,
I decided sending a patch I had in place for sometime and always forgot
sending upstream.

Anyway, the patch I sent is no longer useful.

Thanks luis. We hope that you will continue using these test cases and keep providing comments on them.

Regards--
Subrata


Thanks for your review!
Luis
--
[ Luis Claudio R. Goncalves                    Bass - Gospel - RT ]
[ Fingerprint: 4FDD B8C4 3C59 34BD 8BE9  2696 7203 D980 A448 C8F8 ]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list



--
Regards & Thanks--
Subrata