From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] munmap: Flexible mem unmap operation interface for scheduling latency Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:49 -0400 Message-ID: <1303821049.18763.20.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> References: <1303728272-11408-1-git-send-email-leemgs1@gmail.com> <1303760837.4865.22.camel@laptop> <1303763393.18763.16.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1303802720.20212.7.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Geunsik Lim , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Hugh Dickins , Darren Hart , linux-kernel , linux-rt-users To: Peter Zijlstra Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1303802720.20212.7.camel@twins> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 16:29 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 21:47 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > Also, -rt doesn't care since it already has preemptible mmu_gather. > > > > To be fair, he did state: > > > > > In general, This is not a critical latency-path on preemption mode > > > (PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY / PREEMPT_DESKTOP / PREEMPT_RT) > > That doesn't parse for me... what does it say? The only one not listed > is the non-preempt option, that wouldn't reschedule no matter what > ZAP_BLOCK_SIZE. Heh, it didn't parse for me, as I took PREEMPT_DESKTOP and thought it said PREEMPT_NONE. Oh well. -- Steve