Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:22:57 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: Scheduling latencies news: less RAM = less latency |
| |
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> prune_dcache() I can believe. But the report was about d_lookup(). So > somebody is using bad profiling information, and that's dangerous.
sure - d_lookup() is definitely bogus.
> Also, the si_meminfo() etc stuff is just ridiculous. It's not a question > of latency: it's a question of CPU usage. We need to just get rid of > those functions instead of hacking around them - regardless of whether > you add "reschedule" calls in them, they just eat too much CPU, plain > and simple. Again, please don't treat the symptoms - I will not accept > patches that just say "oh, this is crap, so let's reschedule a bit > here". They need to be fixed properly or not at all.
i agree - I wanted to have something for 2.2 for people to test - i wanted to cure symptoms first, we have way too many latency sources right now and i first wanted to get something that can be tested. I think that the uaccess.h changes are too intrusive as well - i'll rework these things.
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |