On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 17:39 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/rcupdate.c b/kernel/rcupdate.c
> index 48d3bce..b107562 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcupdate.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcupdate.c
> @@ -149,11 +149,10 @@ void fastcall call_rcu_bh(struct rcu_hea
> *rdp->nxttail = head;
> rdp->nxttail = &head->next;
> rdp->count++;
> -/*
> - * Should we directly call rcu_do_batch() here ?
> - * if (unlikely(rdp->count > 10000))
> - * rcu_do_batch(rdp);
> - */
> +
> + if (unlikely(++rdp->count > 100))
> + set_need_resched();
> +
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
This increments rdp->count twice - is that intentional?
Also what was the story deal with the commented out code?
Lee
-
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/
- References:
- 2.6.15-rc5: latency regression vs 2.6.14 in exit_mmap->free_pgtables
- Re: 2.6.15-rc5: latency regression vs 2.6.14 in exit_mmap->free_pgtables
- Re: 2.6.15-rc5: latency regression vs 2.6.14 in exit_mmap->free_pgtables
- [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
[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]