Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:32:47 +0200 (CEST)
To: torvalds@osdl.org, dipankar@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: VFS: file-max limit 50044 reached
Message-ID: <JTFDVq8K.1129537967.5390760.khali@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0510161912050.23590@g5.osdl.org>
From: "Jean Delvare" <khali@linux-fr.org>
Bounce-To: "Jean Delvare" <khali@linux-fr.org>
CC: "Serge Belyshev" <belyshev@depni.sinp.msu.ru>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>,
       "Manfred Spraul" <manfred@colorfullife.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1154
Lines: 31


Hi Linus, Dipankar, all,

On 2005-10-17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I would _really_ prefer to not do this in the system call hot-path by
> default. That is unquestionably the hottest path in the kernel by far.
>
> It would be _much_ better to set one of the TIF_WORK flags when there's a
> lot of RCU stuff, and do this all in the not-quit-so-hot path of
> do_notify_resume() (on x86, I think others call it other things) instead.
>
> If you use the same kind of "set the TIF flag every 1000 rcu events"
> approach that my failed patch had, you'd be much better off.
>
> In fact, in that path you could even do a full "rcu_process_callbacks()".
> After all, this is not that different from signal handling.
>
> Gaah. I had really hoped to release 2.6.14 tomorrow. It's been a week
> since -rc4.

Isn't reverting the original change an option? 2.6.13 was working OK if
I'm not mistaken.

Thanks,
--
Jean Delvare
-
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/