Re: [PATCH] Significant performace improvements on reiserfs systems

["Dieter Nützel" <Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de>]

Am Donnerstag, 20. September 2001 22:52 schrieb Robert Love:
> On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 13:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Andrew, are these still maintained or should I pull out the reiserfs
> > > bits?
> >
> > This is the reiserfs part - it applies to 2.4.10-pre12 OK.
> >
> > For the purposes of Robert's patch, conditional_schedule()
> > should be defined as
> >
> > 	if (current->need_resched && current->lock_depth == 0) {
> > 		unlock_kernel();
> > 		lock_kernel();
> > 	}
> >
> > which is somewhat crufty, because the implementation of lock_kernel()
> > is arch-specific.  But all architectures seem to implement it the same
> > way.

> > <patch snipped>
>
> Looks nice, Andrew.
>
> Anyone try this? (I don't use ReiserFS).

Yes, I will...:-)
Send it along.

>
> I am putting together a conditional scheduling patch to fix some of the
> worst cases, for use in conjunction with the preemption patch, and this
> might be useful.

The conditional_schedule() function hampered me from running it already.

-Dieter