Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934537Ab3HJQKe (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Aug 2013 12:10:34 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([193.170.194.197]:35845 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934372Ab3HJQKd (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Aug 2013 12:10:33 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 18:10:31 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andi Kleen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , the arch/x86 maintainers , Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/13] x86: Move cond resched for copy_{from,to}_user into low level code 64bit Message-ID: <20130810161031.GK19750@two.firstfloor.org> References: <1376089460-5459-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1376089460-5459-11-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 675 Lines: 18 > Most of this series looks fine, but I really think that we > could/should just take that extra step, and say "no, user accesses > don't imply that we need to check for scheduling". Hmm. I can do that, but wouldn't that make CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY mostly equivalent to CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE? Need to check how many other reschedule tests are left then for VOLUNTARY. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/