Messages in this thread | | | From | "Davide Libenzi" <> | Subject | Re: [patch] adaptive semaphores: better performance for "short semaphores" or "long spinlocks" | Date | Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:57:44 +0100 |
| |
Monday, February 28, 2000 1:01 AM Jamie Lokier <lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk> wrote : > Perhaps it would be better for a "short spin" to actually perform all > the calculations of a schedule (goodness loop etc.), while checking to > see if it should abort. > > That way the overhead of a real schedule() would be avoided when the > contention isn't that long, and when there is a schedule, most of the > hard work has been done already.
I've about 2 years of agreement here ;)
Davide.
-- Feel free, feel Debian !
- 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/
| |