Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable

Daniel Phillips
2002-01-14T04:59:47Z

On January 13, 2002 04:36 pm, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 04:18:29PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
>
> > What somehow got lost in this discussion, that both patches don't
> > necessarily conflict with each other, they both attack the same problem
> > with different approaches, which complement each other. I prefer to get
> > the best of both patches.
>
> If you do this (and I've seen the results of doing both at once vs only
> either of then vs pure) then there's NO benifit for the preemption left.

Sorry, that's incorrect. I stated why earlier in this thread and akpm signed
off on it. With preempt you get ASAP (i.e., as soon as the outermost
spinlock is done) process scheduling. With hand-coded scheduling points you
get 'as soon as it happens to hit a scheduling point'.

That is not the only benefit, just the most obvious one.

--
Daniel