From: "Lee Revell" <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: "Nick Piggin" <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: "Davide Libenzi" <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
"Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
"Ravikiran G Thirumalai" <kiran@scalex86.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Nikita Danilov" <nikita@clusterfs.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Eric Dumazet" <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] queued spinlocks (i386)
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:44:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <75b66ecd0703292144x2dd9df30y3c316d54d2e5f7d@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070330021717.GF19407@wotan.suse.de>
On 3/29/07, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:06:41PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > Until someone fixes all the places in the kernel where scheduling can
> > be held off for tens of milliseconds, CONFIG_PREEMPT will be an
> > absolute requirement for many applications like audio and gaming.
>
> There's nothing wrong with CONFIG_PREEMPT for those users. We have
> a few other performance concessions activated with CONFIG_PREEMPT on.
> I think a usual upper of a few miliseconds (especially for SMP) is
> reasonable for a non preempt kernel.
This is within reach - the only major offender left is
rt_secret_rebuild (and possibly other areas of the route cache
handling). Eric Dumazet had some suggestions to fix it, but the
details are beyond my area of expertise.
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-30 4:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-25 15:54 Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-27 15:22 ` Andi Kleen
2007-03-28 7:04 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-29 18:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-29 22:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-03-30 2:06 ` Lee Revell
2007-03-30 2:17 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-30 4:44 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2007-03-30 1:53 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=75b66ecd0703292144x2dd9df30y3c316d54d2e5f7d@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®