lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others)
From
Date
On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 21:19, spaminos-ker@yahoo.com wrote:
> --- Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> > Is this an SMP machine? There were problems with that version of the
> > voluntary preemption patches on SMP. The latest version, Q3, should fix
> > these.
> >
> No, it's a single CPU Athlon 1800+, the kernel is compiled in with support for
> SMP system, but that should not have any impact.
>

It shouldn't, but it can. For example taking a spinlock just disables
preemption with a UP kernel, but with an SMP kernel I believe you can
actually end up spinning. You would have to have hit a locking bug or
race condition for this to happen. Just to be certain, can you
reproduce the problem with a UP kernel?

Lee

-
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 14:05    [W:0.323 / U:0.480 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site