* Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh? I thought the idea of the voluntary-preempt thing was to stick
> cond_rescheds into might_sleep. At least that was the part I think I
> objected to... but I don't think I was one of the participants in that
> flamewar :)
the VP patchset consisted of dozens of latency-breakers, of the
->break_lock mechanism, of the might_sleep()s (which were placed based
on latency tracing tools) and on the cond_resched()s too, (and other
stuff i forget). Most of this is upstream now. To put a cond_resched()
into might_sleep() is now a 5-liner :-)
Ingo
-
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/
[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]
