From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] poll: Avoid extra wakeups in select/poll Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:35:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20090429073539.GR27382@one.firstfloor.org> References: <49F3308B.1030507@cosmosbay.com> <20090426.020411.157511269.davem@davemloft.net> <49F43B8F.2050907@cosmosbay.com> <87ab60rh8t.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <49F71B63.8010503@cosmosbay.com> <20090429002049.4bbc8105.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Dumazet , linux kernel , Andi Kleen , David Miller , cl@linux.com, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, haoki@redhat.com, mchan@broadcom.com, davidel@xmailserver.org, Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Return-path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:33542 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757432AbZD2Hbg (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:31:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090429002049.4bbc8105.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Seems that this is a virtuous patch even though Christoph is struggling > a bit to test it? The main drawback is that the select/poll data structures will get larger. That could cause regression in theory. But I suspect the win in some situations is still worth it. Of course it would be nice if it handled more situations (like multiple reader etc.) -Andi