[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611070943160.3791@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:44:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: akpm@...l.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + sched-use-tasklet-to-call-balancing.patch added to -mm tree
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i'm not sure i get the point of this whole do-rebalance-in-tasklet idea.
> A tasklet is global to the system. The rebalance tick was per-CPU. This
> is not an equivalent change at all. What am i missing?
A tasklet runs per cpu. In many ways it is equivalent to an interrupt
context just interrupts are enabled.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists