On Thursday 23 February 2006 12:22, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> see voluntary preempt.
> >
> > Only when its time slice is used up
>
> or if some other thread gets a higher dynamic prio
> > but then it would sleep a bit later
> > in user space.
>
> ... but that is without the semaphore held! (and that is the entire
> point of this patch, move the sleep moments to outside the lock holding
> area as much as possible, to reduce lock hold times)
And you verified this happens often in your workload?
Anyways, how about adding a down_no_preempt() or similar instead
that won't voluntarily preempt?
-Andi
-
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]
