From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>,
tiwai@suse.de, Robert Love <rml@ximian.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RCU for low latency (experimental)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:34:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040324233430.GJ2065@dualathlon.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040324231145.GB12035@in.ibm.com>
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 04:41:45AM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> That was not 16 callbacks per tick, it was 16 callbacks in one
> batch of a single softirq. And then I reschedule the RCU tasklet
sorry so you're already using tasklets in current code? I misunderstood
the current code then.
> to process the rest. I am planning to vary this and see if we
> should do even less per softirq.
yes, I think 16 is too much, the softirq code should just retry 10
times, summing up to 160 callbacks. After you re-arm the tasklet the
first time, all other rearmed invocations should probably execute less
callbacks than 16.
it greatly depends on the number of times we retry a softirq before
giving up and offloading the work to ksoftirqd, that number is 10
currently (see MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART). The bigger that number, the less
callbacks you can execute per tasklet.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-24 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-23 10:17 [PATCH] RCU for low latency (experimental) Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 10:25 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-23 10:41 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 10:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-03-23 10:45 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 12:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-23 12:40 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 12:50 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-24 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-03-24 17:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-24 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-03-24 23:36 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-25 0:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-03-24 21:39 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-24 22:53 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-24 23:11 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-24 23:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2004-03-24 23:46 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-24 23:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-28 16:53 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-03-28 17:20 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-28 17:28 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-03-29 10:43 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-03-29 12:20 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 12:40 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-03-23 12:29 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-03-23 12:34 ` Dipankar Sarma
2004-03-23 12:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=20040324233430.GJ2065@dualathlon.random \
--to=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=rml@ximian.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
/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