[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1284385967.17152.13.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:52:47 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with
nr_running
On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 10:41 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Yeah, without it you can starve the already running task on massive
> forks.
>
> Still, I'm not quite sure why people really care about fork() on time
> sensitive paths, its a very expensive thing to do, pre-fork() and wake
> when you need it, is what I would say.
Fork is used all over the place in Linux. Every shell script uses it to
execute commands. Bad fork behavior shows up in just doing a build of
the kernel.
-- 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