[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1284386079.2275.290.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:54:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.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 09:52 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 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.
Sure, but there's a difference between bad fork behaviour and the lowest
possible latency. But maybe I'm too paranoid from doing -rt, but the
first thing I'd do is get all resource allocations out from your fast
path.
--
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