[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254988350.26976.256.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 09:52:30 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
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, 2009-10-07 at 11:21 -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> 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()
NACK, delaying the reschedule is not an option
--
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