From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67DD0BE67; Sun, 2 Feb 2025 22:29:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738535366; cv=none; b=HhBQUnK9wZ6wL/gde/SB1I1zsEAo1rtcc0CCsQFb4Q4uio5JLpAQyiaqTFWzwgHFr09SKEc9d0XxhXtZQkZrToWqVYXsgv6sAQ5Dxr5NK9CgBmRf38bjrU/MJioC+l0GvlEfflA248vlX3xELHCrx4LAav5JtYu+O/OhfeI8JSU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738535366; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5jco9qkJre/Jm0X5veB3Q7E4Z6Vl+c8of7hxfrfDpBM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=caXD5E+cyXAqodw4xJD0o+vufipzdAL3SU+8MpXjFtJRWYmHHqk5h14TXIkvvDdQW4+/D5XaOpJv+H6HYhZoCzMZm+P1TyboeJA2fi+hIBqyPOYLl/UhbsmeHvlbnlpfxfZS3Zw5IzWMk2DrvXfdRqqL1Ibc4CjuBon1aEHZx+4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D3C3C4CED1; Sun, 2 Feb 2025 22:29:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 17:29:21 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Linus Torvalds , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Ankur Arora , linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, luto@kernel.org, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, hpa@zytor.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, mgorman@suse.de, jon.grimm@amd.com, bharata@amd.com, raghavendra.kt@amd.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, jgross@suse.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Joel Fernandes , Vineeth Pillai , Suleiman Souhlal , Ingo Molnar , Clark Williams , bigeasy@linutronix.de, daniel.wagner@suse.com, joseph.salisbury@oracle.com, broonie@gmail.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] sched: Extended scheduler time slice Message-ID: <20250202172921.6bcce689@batman.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20250131225837.972218232@goodmis.org> <20250131225942.365475324@goodmis.org> <20250201180810.1faf4906@batman.local.home> <20250201222208.0b0d0f5c@batman.local.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 07:22:08 +0000 Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 10:22:08PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > And before seeing Peter's use of yield(), I was reluctant to use it for > > the very same reasons you mentioned above. In my test programs, I was > > simply using getuid(), as that was one of the quickest syscalls. > > Is getuid() guaranteed to issue a syscall? It feels like the kind of > information that a tricksy libc could cache. Traditionally, I think > we've used getppid() as the canonical "very cheap syscall" as no layer > can cache that information. Maybe that was what I used. Can't remember. And I think I even open coded it using syscall() to not even rely on glibc. -- Steve