[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140903093008.GC4783@worktop.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:30:08 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: exit busy loop when another process is
runnable
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 02:58:33PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 09/02/2014 06:24 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> The patch only try to improve the performance of busy read (and test
> results shows impressive changes). It does not change anything for busy
> poll. Considering there maybe two processes in one cpu, one is doing
> busy read and one is doing busy polling. This patch may in fact help the
> busy polling performance in this case.
>
> It's good to discuss the ideas of busy poll together, but it was out of
> the scope of this patch. We can try to do optimization on top.
No thta's just wrong, blocked read and blocking select should behave the
same.
--
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