From: Pierre Peiffer <pierre.peiffer@bull.net>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: "Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Dinakar Guniguntala" <dino@in.ibm.com>,
"Jean-Pierre Dion" <jean-pierre.dion@bull.net>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Jakub Jelinek" <jakub@redhat.com>,
"Darren Hart" <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>,
"Sébastien Dugué" <sebastien.dugue@bull.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.20-rc4 1/4] futex priority based wakeup
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:03:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45A4D5FC.7060808@bull.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45A4D249.8080904@bull.net>
Pierre Peiffer a écrit :
> Ulrich Drepper a écrit :
>>
>> I have never seen performance numbers for this. If it is punishing
>> existing code in a measurable way I think it's not anacceptable default
>> behavior.
> May be, supposing it makes sense to respect the priority order only for
> real-time pthreads, I can register all SCHED_OTHER threads to the same
> MAX_RT_PRIO priotity ?
Moreover, the performance must be considered, sure, but after all, "man
pthread_cond_broadcast" says:
<<
If more than one thread is blocked on a condition variable, the
scheduling policy shall determine the order in which threads are
unblocked.
>>
... this is not true today ...
(of course, "shall" does not mean "mandatory", I know ;-) )
--
Pierre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-10 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <45A3B330.9000104@bull.net>
2007-01-09 16:16 ` [PATCH 2.6.20-rc4 1/4] futex priority based wakeup Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-09 16:29 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-01-10 11:47 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-10 12:03 ` Pierre Peiffer [this message]
2007-01-10 12:54 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-01-10 15:05 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-10 18:15 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-01-11 7:20 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-01-09 17:59 ` Daniel Walker
2007-01-10 16:11 ` Daniel Walker
2007-01-10 16:29 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-10 16:33 ` Daniel Walker
2007-01-09 16:16 ` [PATCH 2.6.20-rc4 2/4] Make futex_wait() use an hrtimer for timeout Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-09 16:20 ` [PATCH 2.6.20-rc4 3/4] futex_requeue_pi optimization Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-09 16:33 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-01-10 8:17 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-10 8:24 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-01-09 16:25 ` [PATCH 2.6.20-rc4 4/4][RFC] sys_futex64 : allows 64bit futexes Pierre Peiffer
2007-01-11 21:49 ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-11 22:14 ` Jakub Jelinek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=45A4D5FC.7060808@bull.net \
--to=pierre.peiffer@bull.net \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jean-pierre.dion@bull.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sebastien.dugue@bull.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.