From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, john cooper <john.cooper@timesys.com>
Subject: Re: spinaphore conceptual draft (was discussion of RT patch)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 22:02:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1117245765.6477.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <934f64a205052715315c21d722@mail.gmail.com>
One thing you are forgetting is that we are not just talking about the
latencies of contention. We are talking about the latency of a high
priority process when it wakes up to the time it runs. Most of the time
a spin lock stops preemption, either with (CONFIG_PREEMPT)
preempt_disable or simple turning off interrupts. With Ingo's mutexes,
the places with spin_locks are now preemptable. So there is probably
lots of times that it would be better to just spin on contention, but
that's not what Ingo's spin_locks are saving us. It's to keep most of
the kernel preemptable.
The priority inheritance of spin_locks is simply there to protect from
priority inversion.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-28 2:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-27 22:31 spinaphore conceptual draft (was discussion of RT patch) David Nicol
2005-05-28 1:04 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-29 5:25 ` David Nicol
2005-05-29 13:41 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-29 8:42 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-05-29 13:45 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-29 13:29 ` Joe Seigh
2005-05-29 15:32 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-30 11:06 ` spinaphore conceptual draft Andi Kleen
2005-05-30 14:52 ` Chris Friesen
2005-05-30 16:40 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-30 17:11 ` Chris Friesen
2005-05-30 17:46 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-30 18:04 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-30 18:40 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2005-05-30 18:54 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-30 19:24 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-30 19:28 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-30 19:39 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-31 22:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2005-05-28 1:05 ` spinaphore conceptual draft (was discussion of RT patch) john cooper
2005-05-28 2:02 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2005-05-28 13:59 ` Alan Cox
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=1117245765.6477.34.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=davidnicol@gmail.com \
--cc=john.cooper@timesys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox