Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967382AbaFRO3X (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:29:23 -0400 Received: from qmta10.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.17]:51461 "EHLO qmta10.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966889AbaFRO3U (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:29:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:29:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter To: Andi Kleen cc: Dave Hansen , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, LKML , Josh Triplett , "Chen, Tim C" Subject: Re: [bisected] pre-3.16 regression on open() scalability In-Reply-To: <20140618001517.GL8178@tassilo.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <539B594C.8070004@intel.com> <20140613224519.GV4581@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <53A0CAE5.9000702@intel.com> <20140618001517.GL8178@tassilo.jf.intel.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Andi Kleen wrote: > I still think it's totally the wrong place. cond_resched() is in so > many fast paths (every lock, every allocation). It just doesn't > make sense to add non essential things like this to it. > > I would be rather to just revert the original patch. I fully agree. -- 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/