lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] local_irq_disable removal


On Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Esben Nielsen wrote:

> For me it is perfectly ok if RCU code, buffer caches etc use
> raw_local_irq_disable(). I consider that code to be "core" code.

This distinction seem completly baseless to me. Core code doesn't
carry any weight . The question is , can the code be called from real
interrupt context ? If not then don't protect it.

>
> The current soft-irq states only gives us better hard-irq latency but
> nothing else. I think the overhead runtime and the complication of the
> code is way too big for gaining only that.

Interrupt response is massive, check the adeos vs. RT numbers . They did
one test which was just interrupt latency.


Daniel

-
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: 2005-06-11 18:42    [W:0.114 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site