From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753695Ab1AZSS1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:18:27 -0500 Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:46410 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752791Ab1AZSS0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 13:18:26 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=IbqAu+t6R+xU2+d9/UJ5P09L3P+h1k7eVHYOUXOSJlwtcA8W+TuXRqu2JwKD85md3/ XRX+bxkyDRkE7rnwunwpHWqSsF3kdjfh8KSzHcecu1cNtmnjBwTQoo8Jim9hNiBfOIIG +Agu1wpS75ckfVHm3Nw6Z2D/uu2eQAR28FGLY= Subject: Re: sys_epoll_wait high CPU load in 2.6.37 From: Eric Dumazet To: Davide Libenzi Cc: Shawn Bohrer , Simon Kirby , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner In-Reply-To: References: <20110126000932.GA23089@hostway.ca> <1296026298.2633.19.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1296040578.2899.59.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1296056600.2899.66.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1296057590.2899.73.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1296058409.2899.81.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110126172006.GA9568@BohrerMBP.rgmadvisors.com> <1296064311.2899.90.camel@edumazet-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:18:20 +0100 Message-ID: <1296065900.2899.108.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Le mercredi 26 janvier 2011 à 10:06 -0800, Davide Libenzi a écrit : > Eric, if you look at fs/select.c (~line 925), poll does exactly the same > thing as epoll do. > It too, ignores the eventual return value of poll_select_set_timeout(), so > maybe a little bit more optimized ktime_get_ts+timespec_add_ms could make > sense. > OK, I'll post a V3 ;) Thanks