From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
arjan@linux.intel.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
hch@infradead.org, rminnich@sandia.gov, ericvh@gmail.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #3
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:29:51 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <492A2DBF.3030208@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081123094551.GQ30453@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> And @sync might be useful depending on who's waking it up, so we
>> either need to change the wake interface or give it an easier way to
>> pass those parameters as received. The callback function isn't the
>> right place to ignore those parameters. It simply doesn't know why
>> the caller is passing them in or what they mean under the
>> circumstances.
>
> We'll likely eliminate the 'sync' parameter from the scheduler. It's
> not a flag that should be proliferated.
But it's still being used in quite hot paths (pipe, splice, socket)
and I don't really wanna mix up a change which can cause subtle
scheduling related performance regression into this patch. How about
using the dummy waitqueue hack for now and when removing the @sync
param, switch it to one of wakeup APIs? I'll be happy to add big /*
TODO */ comment in the function.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-24 4:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-22 8:58 [PATCH fwd] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep Miklos Szeredi
2008-11-22 9:27 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-22 12:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-11-22 12:43 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-22 18:53 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-23 1:26 ` poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #3 Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 2:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-23 3:05 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 3:34 ` Brad Boyer
2008-11-23 3:48 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 8:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:14 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 9:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:43 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-23 9:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24 4:29 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2008-11-24 4:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-24 5:05 ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-24 6:09 ` [PATCH] poll: allow f_op->poll to sleep, take #4 Tejun Heo
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=492A2DBF.3030208@gmail.com \
--to=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rminnich@sandia.gov \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.