Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266175AbUIIVFa (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:05:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266218AbUIIVFF (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:05:05 -0400 Received: from host-65-117-135-105.timesys.com ([65.117.135.105]:35007 "EHLO yoda.timesys") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266891AbUIIVDm (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:03:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 17:03:35 -0400 To: Lee Revell Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel , felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org, Florian Schmidt , "K.R. Foley" , Mark_H_Johnson@Raytheon.com, scott@timesys.com Subject: Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk12-R6 Message-ID: <20040909210335.GB1014@yoda.timesys> References: <20040903120957.00665413@mango.fruits.de> <20040904195141.GA6208@elte.hu> <20040905140249.GA23502@elte.hu> <20040906110626.GA32320@elte.hu> <1094626562.1362.99.camel@krustophenia.net> <20040909192924.GA1672@elte.hu> <1094758399.1362.268.camel@krustophenia.net> <1094762629.1362.320.camel@krustophenia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1094762629.1362.320.camel@krustophenia.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i From: Scott Wood Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1361 Lines: 30 On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 04:43:49PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote: > On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 15:33, Lee Revell wrote: > > I believe Scott Wood suggested a fix back when I first reported this, > > have to check my mailbox. Scott? > > > > Nope, checking the original thread, Scott pointed out that any RT > process will have mlockall'ed anyway and thus won't be affected by this > latency. So, this one would be cool to fix, but it's not a problem as > such. Though, if this is an actual lock latency (as opposed to merely being a page-fault latency suffered by the task swapping something in), it could affect mlockall'd processes as well due to some other task swapping. One way to fix the latency would be to turn the locks involved into sleeping mutexes. There's a comment in the code saying that swaplock cannot be turned into a semaphore, but it does not say why; if this is due to it nesting in other locks, those locks would need to be converted as well. It could turn into quite a mess doing it manually, though turning all spinlocks into mutexes (except hand-chosen exceptions) should take care of it. -Scott - 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/