Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:34:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:33:16 -0500 Received: from zero.tech9.net ([209.61.188.187]:48132 "EHLO zero.tech9.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:32:20 -0500 Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable From: Robert Love To: "J.A. Magallon" Cc: Stephan von Krawczynski , Alan Cox , zippel@linux-m68k.org, ken@canit.se, arjan@fenrus.demon.nl, landley@trommello.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20020114160256.A2922@werewolf.able.es> In-Reply-To: <200201140033.BAA04292@webserver.ithnet.com> <20020114104532.59950d86.skraw@ithnet.com> <20020114160256.A2922@werewolf.able.es> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.1 Date: 14 Jan 2002 14:35:13 -0500 Message-Id: <1011036915.4604.2.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2002-01-14 at 10:02, J.A. Magallon wrote: > Yup. That remind me of... > Would there be any kernel call every driver is doing just to hide there > a conditional_schedule() so everyone does it even without knowledge of it ? > Just like Apple put the SystemTask() inside GetNextEvent()... It's not nearly that easy. If it were, we would all certainly switch to the preemptive kernel design, and preempt whenever and wherever we needed. Instead, we have to worry about reentrancy and thus can not preempt inside critical regions (denoted by spinlocks). So we can't have preempt there, and have more work to do -- thus this discussion. Robert Love - 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/