Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:53:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:52:27 -0500 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:56307 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:51:37 -0500 Message-ID: <3C433695.A9188FF2@mvista.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 11:50:45 -0800 From: george anzinger Organization: Monta Vista Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20b i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: arjanv@redhat.com CC: "J.A. Magallon" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable In-Reply-To: <20020114104532.59950d86.skraw@ithnet.com>; from skraw@ithnet.com on lun ene 14 2002 at 10:45:32 +0100 <20020114160256.A2922@werewolf.able.es> <3C42F33C.88F423F6@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > "J.A. Magallon" wrote: > > > > On 20020114 Stephan von Krawczynski wrote: > > > > > >Hm, obviously the ll-patches look simple, but their pure required number makes > > >me think they are as well stupid as simple. This whole story looks like making > > >an old mac do real multitasking, just spread around scheduling points > > > > 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()... > > Well the preempt patch sort of does this in every spin_unlock*() ..... > - Gosh, not really. The nature of the preempt patch is to allow preemption on completion of the interrupt that put the contending task back in the run list. This can not be done if a spin lock is held, so yes, there is a test on exit from the spin lock, but the point is that this is only needed when the lock is release, not in unlocked code. The utility of most of the ll patches is that they address the problem within locked regions. This is why there is a lock-break patch that is designed to augment the preempt patch. It picks up several of the long held spin locks and pops out of them early to allow preemption, and then relocks and continues (after picking up the pieces, of course). -- George george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ Real time sched: http://sourceforge.net/projects/rtsched/ - 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/