[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:0.117 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site