[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0707161638460.18244@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:44:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] Convert the RCU tasklet into a softirq
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Btw, are there any numbers on this? Is this whole thing actually
> noticeable?
Besides the obvious removal of code?
The old way actually made an effort to create per_cpu tasklets! So that
the tasklets *can* run simultaneously, making it in essense a softirq.
Since tasklets are implemented by the softirq, with a lot of code to make
a tasklet function run only on one CPU at a time, and it can run on any
CPU. By converting the rcu tasklet (which had work to make it act like a
softirq) to just be a softirq, we removed all the extra overhead of a
tasklet.
But to answer your question. No, I didn't take any actual measurements.
The changes just seemed obvious to me (and others).
-- Steve
-
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