[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: must-fix list for 2.6.0
    Rick Lindsley <> wrote:
    > Why is this bad?
    > (a) if it does busy looping through sched_yield it will eat cycles which
    > might not have happened

    Things like OpenOffice _do_ busy loop on sched_yield(). It appears with
    that patch, OO will sit there chewing ~1% of CPU. Not great, but not bad

    A few kernels ago, OpenOffice would take sixty seconds to just flop down a
    menu if there was a kernel build happening at the same time. That is just
    utterly broken, so if we're going to leave the sched.c code as-is then we
    *require* that all applications be updated to not spin on sched_yield.

    There's just no question about that. It may end up not being acceptable.

    Has anyone looked at what Andrea did in -aa? I assume some suitable
    compromise was achieved there.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.026 / U:8.580 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site