Re: [patch] Latency Tracer, voluntary-preempt-2.6.8-rc4-O6

Theodore Ts'o
2004-08-19T19:34:03Z

On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 07:19:58AM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > I doubt SHA_CODE_SIZE will make a sufficient difference to avoid the
> > latency problems. What we would need to do is to change the code so
> > that the rekey operation in __check_and_rekey takes place in a
> > workqueue. Say, something like this (warning, I haven't tested this
> > patch; if it breaks, you get to keep both pieces):
> >
>
> Tested, works for me. This should probably be pushed upstream, as well
> as added to -P5, correct? Is there any disadvantage to doing it this
> way?

Great, I will be pushing this upstream very shortly.

- Ted