[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910071119450.9296@gentwo.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:21:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V5 19/19] SLUB: Experimental new fastpath w/o
interrupt disable
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> You are already calling the scheduler when ending the _fast_ path. I
> don't see the problem with calling it when you end the slow path
> execution.
Well yes that gives rise to the thought of using
preempt_enable_no_sched()
at the end of the fastpath as well. Constant calls into the scheduler
could be a major performance issue. I dont notice it here since I usually
cannot affort the preempt overhead and build kernels without support for
it.
--
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