[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxJ4x3przA6acW5qGZ-+MWSYTw0h6UjWH-D1xHcb9gnZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 13:58:59 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: Break up long wake list walk
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> So _the_ problem with yield() is when you hit this with a RT task it
> will busy spin and possibly not allow the task that actually has the
> lock to make progress at all.
I thought we had explicitly defined yield() to not do that.
But I guess we could make this yielding behavior depend on a few more
heuristics. So do the yield only when there is contention, and when
it's a non-RT task.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists