![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote: > > I believe Scott Wood suggested a fix back when I first reported this, > > have to check my mailbox. Scott?> > Nope, checking the original thread, Scott pointed out that any RT > process will have mlockall'ed anyway and thus won't be affected by > this latency. So, this one would be cool to fix, but it's not a > problem as such. RT threads will be affected by this latency just as much because it's a non-preemptable critical section. You are right in that an RT task wont see the overhead itself because it doesnt generate swap entries. 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||