Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:49:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:49:06 -0500 Received: from dsl-213-023-038-231.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.38.231]:22283 "EHLO starship.berlin") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 16:48:47 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 22:51:55 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Andrew Morton , Anton Blanchard , Andrea Arcangeli , Luigi Genoni , Dieter N?tzel , Marcelo Tosatti , Linux Kernel List , Robert Love In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On January 8, 2002 10:08 pm, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > The preemptible kernel can reschedule, on average, sooner than the > > scheduling-point kernel, which has to wait for a scheduling point to > > roll around. > > The preemptible kernel ALSO has to wait for a scheduling point > to roll around, since it cannot preempt with spinlocks held. Think about the relative amount of time spent inside spinlocks vs regular kernel. > Considering this, I don't see much of an advantage to adding > kernel preemption. And now? -- Daniel - 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/