[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FD1AABD.7010602@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 03:33:17 -0400
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
To: leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com
CC: kosaki.motohiro@...il.com, anton.vorontsov@...aro.org,
penberg@...nel.org, b.zolnierkie@...sung.com,
john.stultz@...aro.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
patches@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] vmevent: Convert from deferred timer to deferred
work
(6/8/12 3:28 AM), leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ext KOSAKI Motohiro [mailto:kosaki.motohiro@...il.com]
>> Sent: 08 June, 2012 10:23
> ...
>>> If you wakeup only by signal when memory situation changed you can be
>> not mlocked.
>>> Mlocking uses memory very inefficient way and usually cannot be applied
>> for apps which wants to be notified due to resources restrictions.
>>
>> That's your choice. If you don't need to care cache dropping, We don't
>> enforce it. I only pointed out your explanation was technically incorrect.
>
> My explanation is correct. That is an overhead you have to pay if start to
>use API based on polling from user-space and this overhead narrows API
>applicability.
> Moving all times/tracking to kernel avoid useless wakeups in user-space.
Wrong. CPU don't realized the running code belong to userspace or kernel. Every
code just consume a power. That's why polling timer is wrong from point of power
consumption view.
--
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