lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: spinaphore conceptual draft (was discussion of RT patch)
From
Date
One thing you are forgetting is that we are not just talking about the
latencies of contention. We are talking about the latency of a high
priority process when it wakes up to the time it runs. Most of the time
a spin lock stops preemption, either with (CONFIG_PREEMPT)
preempt_disable or simple turning off interrupts. With Ingo's mutexes,
the places with spin_locks are now preemptable. So there is probably
lots of times that it would be better to just spin on contention, but
that's not what Ingo's spin_locks are saving us. It's to keep most of
the kernel preemptable.

The priority inheritance of spin_locks is simply there to protect from
priority inversion.

-- Steve


-
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: 2005-05-28 04:12    [W:0.067 / U:5.272 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site