lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Likelihood of rt_tasks
Ingo Molnar wrote:

> the unlikely() check in rt_task() was mainly done because there was a
> steady stream of microoptimizations that added unlikely() to rt_task().
> So now we do in everywhere and have removed the unlikely()/likely()
> branches from sched.c. It doesnt really matter in real-world terms, but
> it will make the common case code (non-RT) a tiny bit more compact. And
> i challenge anyone to be able to even measure the difference to an RT
> task.
>

Also, the scenario where it may possibly make a tiny positive
contribution (something *very* scheduler bound) would be using
non-RT tasks I'd say.
-
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 14:04    [W:1.108 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site