From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] dm: Remove dm_bufio_cond_resched() Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 14:39:22 +0200 Message-ID: <1474634362.4025.23.camel@gmail.com> References: <20160913084520.GA5012@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160913133959.GA22833@redhat.com> <20160919105325.GW5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20160923073435.GL2794@worktop> <1474633030.4025.11.camel@gmail.com> <20160923122607.GK5008@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160923122607.GK5008@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Mikulas Patocka , Mike Snitzer , Alasdair Kergon , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, Joe Thornber List-Id: dm-devel.ids On Fri, 2016-09-23 at 14:26 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 02:17:10PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-09-23 at 10:00 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > Is anybody still using PREEMPT_NONE? Most workloads also care > > > > about > > > > latency to some extend. Lots of code has explicit > > > > cond_resched() and > > > > doesn't worry. > > > > > > Dunno. But I bet there are workloads which love it. > > > > SUSE definitely uses it. I had presumed that was enterprise > > standard. > > Hmm, I thought most distros defaulted to PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY. I use PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY for my desktop, that offering much better performance than the PREEMPT desktop targeted kernels (ick), but workhorses run PREEMPT_NONE for maximum throughput. -Mike