Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:51:30 +0200 | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8-rc3-O4 |
| |
* Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> Ingo, do you plan to maintain the voluntary preempt patch against the > -mm series? From looking at Andrew's announcement yesterday it looks > like many latency issues fixed in the voluntary preemption patches are > also fixed in -mm, so it seems like the patch would be much smaller.
yeah, and in addition we've already pushed 99% of our might_sleep() additions to -mm too so that reduces the patch size too, quite significantly.
time is the only limiting factor. Due to these partial merges (we are trying to get all uncontroversial bits into -mm, hence into upstream) the merge to -mm is hard. Especially for lock-breaks that i've done differently than Andrew. I sent a consolidation patch yesterday but this is still work in progress. So i'll do an -mm merge very time i get to do it, but the primary testing still remains on the vanilla kernel (which most people use). > One thing that might be useful is breaking out the irq threading code > as a patch against -mm. Judging from all the -mm latency fixes it > seems like this would work as well as the vanilla kernel+voluntary > preempt.
both softirq threading and hardirq threading will be done separately, yes. Also, most of the switches and source-level distinctions between cond_resched and voluntary_resched variants can go away too. The '-clean' patch in the voluntary-preempt directory shows how it would look like in the end.
> This would also make it easier to identify which are the important > latency fixes from -mm enabling them to be pushed into mainline > sooner. On some of my tests I got 10-20% better results using > vol-preempt+mm vs vol-preempt+vanilla, it would be nice to identify > what changes are responsible.
the plan right now is to push all the known-good stuff into 2.6.9 once 2.6.8 is out. That will unify all the improvements in a natural way. The latest update kernel of FC2 also includes an earlier version of the voluntary-preempt patch (sans any irq threading bits) - and it worked out fine so far.
Ingo - 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/
|  |