Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 07:56:58PM -0600, Wenji Wu wrote:
> Yes, when CONFIG_PREEMPT is disabled, the "problem" won't happen. That is why I put "for 2.6 desktop, low-latency desktop" in the uploaded paper. This "problem" happens in the 2.6 Desktop and Low-latency Desktop.

CONFIG_PREEMPT is only for people that are in for the feeling.  There is no
real world advtantage to it and we should probably remove it again.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
    • From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
    • From: Wenji Wu <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [PATCH] sparc64: dma remove extra brackets
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH -mm] x86_64 UP needs smp_call_function_single
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]