Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:14:23 +0100
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
       Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       mjy@geizhals.at, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG_PREEMPT and server workloads
Message-ID: <20040320121423.GA9009@dualathlon.random>
References: <40591EC1.1060204@geizhals.at> <20040318060358.GC29530@dualathlon.random> <20040318015004.227fddfb.akpm@osdl.org> <20040318145129.GA2246@dualathlon.random> <405A584B.40601@cyberone.com.au> <20040319050948.GN2045@holomorphy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040319050948.GN2045@holomorphy.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 955
Lines: 20

On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 09:09:48PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:17:47PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Technically, I think preempt can still reduce maximum latency
> > depending on whether the time between explicit resched checks
> > is greater than the (small) scheduling overhead that preempt
> > adds.
> > But yeah, that would be in the noise compared with long
> > preempt-off regions.
> > I'm not sure about applications, but maybe some soft-realtime
> > things like audio software benefit from a lower average latency
> > (I don't know).
> 
> Someone really needs to get numbers on this stuff.

Takashi already did it and we know it doesn't reduce the maximum latency.
-
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/