Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264119AbUFPQHa (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:07:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264117AbUFPQHa (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:07:30 -0400 Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:55963 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264113AbUFPQHU (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:07:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:07:14 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dimitri Sivanich Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Option to run cache reap in thread mode Message-ID: <20040616160714.GA14413@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Dimitri Sivanich , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20040616142413.GA5588@sgi.com> <20040616152934.GA13527@infradead.org> <20040616160355.GA5963@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040616160355.GA5963@sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1438 Lines: 26 On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:03:55AM -0500, Dimitri Sivanich wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:29:34PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > YAKT, sigh.. I don't quite understand what you mean with a "holdoff" so > > maybe you could explain what problem you see? You don't like cache_reap > > beeing called from timer context? > > The issue(s) I'm attempting to solve is to achieve more deterministic interrupt > response times on CPU's that have been designated for use as such. By setting > cache_reap to run as a kthread, the cpu is only unavailable during the time > that irq's are disabled. By doing this on a cpu that's been restricted from > running most other processes, I have been able to achieve much more > deterministic interrupt response times. > > So yes, I don't want cache_reap to be called from timer context when I've > configured a CPU as such. Well, if you want deterministic interrupt latencies you should go for a realtime OS. I know Linux is the big thing in the industry, but you're really better off looking for a small Hard RT OS. From the OpenSource world eCOS or RTEMS come to mind. Or even rtlinux/rtai if you want to run a full linux kernel as idle task. - 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/