From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261192AbVFFHri (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:47:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261194AbVFFHri (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:47:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:62420 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261192AbVFFHrg (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 03:47:36 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 09:44:58 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Daniel Walker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez , Oleg Nesterov , Esben Nielsen Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, plist fixes Message-ID: <20050606074458.GA11875@elte.hu> References: <20050605082616.GA26824@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Daniel Walker wrote: > For me it's strictly a speed question. I was reviewing > V0.7.40-04 and it looks like apples and oranges to me. It's more a > question of where do you perfer the latency , in up() or in down() .. > plist is slower for non-RT tasks, but non-RT tasks also get the > benefit of priority ordering. what benefit do non-RT tasks get from plists, compared to the ordered list? Non-RT tasks are not PI handled in any way. Ingo