lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch] "HT scheduler", sched-2.5.63-B3

    On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > Oh, well. I didn't actually even verify that UNIX domain sockets will
    > > cause synchronous wakeups, so the patch may literally be doing nothing
    > > at all. You can try that theory out by just removing the test for
    > > "in_interrupt()".
    >
    > you are not referring to the 'synchronous wakeups' as used by fs/pipe.c,
    > right?

    No, sorry. Bad choice of words.

    The traditional "synchronous wakeups" as used by fs/pipe.c is a hint to
    the scheduler that the waker will go to sleep.

    And no, that's not the hint I'm using at all. I'm only interested in
    "process-synchronous", since if the wakeup isn't process-synchronous then
    "current" doesn't make much sense to me.

    > so i think your current patch should cover unix domain sockets just as
    > well, they certain dont use IRQ-context wakeups.

    Note that "in_interrupt()" will also trigger for callers that call from
    bh-atomic regions as well as actual BH handlers. Which is correct - they
    are both "interrupt contexts" as far as most users should be concerned.

    The unix domain case may well be bh-atomic, I haven't looked at the code.
    I'm pretty much certain that the TCP case _will_ be BH-atomic, even for
    loopback.

    David?

    Linus

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.125 / U:0.116 seconds]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean