Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 18:26:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 18:26:40 -0500 Received: from Expansa.sns.it ([192.167.206.189]:3339 "EHLO Expansa.sns.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 18:26:27 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 00:26:00 +0100 (CET) From: Luigi Genoni To: Daniel Phillips cc: Andrew Morton , Anton Blanchard , Andrea Arcangeli , Dieter N?tzel , Marcelo Tosatti , Rik van Riel , Linux Kernel List , Robert Love Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On January 8, 2002 08:47 pm, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > What a preemptible kernel can do that a non-preemptible kernel can't is: > > > reschedule exactly as often as necessary, instead of having lots of extra > > > schedule points inserted all over the place, firing when *they* think the > > > time is right, which may well be earlier than necessary. > > > > Nope. `if (current->need_resched)' -> the time is right (beyond right, > > actually). > > Oops, sorry, right. > > The preemptible kernel can reschedule, on average, sooner than the > scheduling-point kernel, which has to wait for a scheduling point to roll > around. > mmhhh. At which cost? And then anyway if I have a spinlock, I still have to wait for a scheduling point to roll around. - 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/