* Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
> If the numbers say that there is no performance difference (or even
> better: that the new code performs better or fixes some latency issue
> or whatever), I'll be very happy. But if the numbers say that it's
> worse, no amount of cleanliness really changes that.
Most of the tasklet uses are in rarely used or arcane drivers - in fact
none of my 10 test-boxes utilizes _any_ tasklet in any way that could
even get close to mattering to performance. In other words: i just
cannot test this, nor do i think that others will really test this. I.e.
if we dont approach this problem in some other way, nothing will happen
and Steve's patch will be stalled forever and will live in -rt forever.
(which might be a correct end result too, but i'm just not giving up
this easily :-)
so how about the following, different approach: anyone who has a tasklet
in any performance-sensitive codepath, please yell now. We'll also do a
proactive search for such places. We can convert those places to
softirqs, or move them back into hardirq context. Once this is done -
and i doubt it will go beyond 1-2 places - we can just mass-convert the
other 110 places to the lame but compatible solution of doing them in a
global thread context.
[ and on a similar notion, i still havent given up on seeing all BKL use
gone from the kernel. I expect it to happen any decade now ;-) ]
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]
