From: Helge Hafting <helge.hafting@hist.no>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
Ricky Beam <jfbeam@bluetronic.net>,
Zilvinas Valinskas <zilvinas@gemtek.lt>,
Erik Tews <erik@debian.franken.de>,
linux-kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.9 rc2 freezing
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:39:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4149512E.9040005@hist.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41488140.4050109@pobox.com>
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
>
>> Interesting. Still, this looks like a specific bug that needs fixing,
>> it doesn't imply that preemption is a hack. For many workloads
>> preemption is a necessity.
>
>
>
> For any workload that you feel preemption is a necessity, that
> indicates a latency problem in the kernel that should be solved.
>
> Preemption is a hack that hides broken drivers, IMHO.
>
> I would rather directly address any latency problems that appear.
Current preempt is broken, sure. But having robust preempt
would allow code simplification. Long loops outside critical
sections would be ok - no time or code spent testing for a need for
rescheduling because you'll be preempted when necessary anyway.
Or am I missing something? Other than that current preempt isn't up to
this and might be hard to get there?
Helge Hafting
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-16 8:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-13 16:55 2.6.9 rc2 freezing Zilvinas Valinskas
2004-09-13 17:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-13 17:16 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
2004-09-15 8:25 ` Erik Tews
2004-09-15 9:58 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
2004-09-15 14:55 ` Ricky Beam
2004-09-15 15:48 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-15 15:58 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-15 16:06 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-15 16:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-15 16:58 ` Ricky Beam
2004-09-15 17:49 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-15 17:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-09-15 17:59 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-16 8:39 ` Helge Hafting [this message]
2004-09-17 8:05 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
2004-09-17 13:21 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
2004-09-15 16:59 ` Dave Jones
2004-09-13 17:19 ` Zilvinas Valinskas
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=4149512E.9040005@hist.no \
--to=helge.hafting@hist.no \
--cc=erik@debian.franken.de \
--cc=jfbeam@bluetronic.net \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=zilvinas@gemtek.lt \
/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