linux-kernel - Re: PREEMPT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091030224528.GN6782@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:45:28 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Patrik Kluba <kpajko79@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RCU on UP

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:10:02AM -0700, Patrik Kluba wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Does the preemptible RCU implementation have better performance (lower
> latency?) than the classic RCU implementation on embedded uniprocessor
> systems? I can't find any information about this in Documentation/.

I would expect that you would get the best latencies on UP by using
the -rt patchset and preemptible RCU.  I don't know that anyone has
carefully measured the combination of vanilla CONFIG_PREEMPT kernel
and preemptible RCU on UP.

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/