Matt wrote:
> I would have thought so too, but it also appears to consistently reduce
> time spent in the kernel.
Interesting. Thanks for the continuing good work.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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:
- [RFC][PATCH 00/10] Task watchers v2 Introduction
- From: Matt Helsley <[email protected]>
- [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- From: Matt Helsley <[email protected]>
- Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- From: Matt Helsley <[email protected]>
- Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- From: Matt Helsley <[email protected]>
- [RFC][PATCH 00/10] Task watchers v2 Introduction
- Prev by Date: [patch 13/23] clockevents: core
- Next by Date: Re: 2.6.18-mm2 -- EIP: [<c11a962e>] klist_node_init+0x2b/0x3a SS:ESP 0068:f63a5f80
- Previous by thread: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark
- Next by thread: [RFC][PATCH 01/10] Task watchers v2 Task watchers v2
- Index(es):
 |