[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
    On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Dipankar Sarma wrote:

    > I do agree that the two layers of batching really makes things
    > subtle. I think the best we can do is to figure out some way of
    > automatic throttling in RCU and forced quiescent state under extreme
    > conditions. That way we will have less dependency on softirq
    > throttling.

    would it make sense to have the RCU subsystems with a threshold so that
    when more then X items are outstanding they trigger a premption of all
    other CPU's ASAP (forceing the scheduling break needed to make progress on
    clearing RCU)? This wouldn't work in all cases, but it could significantly
    reduce the problem situations.

    David Lang

    There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
    -- C.A.R. Hoare

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-01-03 14:34    [W:0.018 / U:40.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site