[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Network slowdown due to CFS
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 09:49:35 -0700
"David Schwartz" <> wrote:

> > * Jarek Poplawski <> wrote:
> >
> > > BTW, it looks like risky to criticise sched_yield too much: some
> > > people can misinterpret such discussions and stop using this at
> > > all, even where it's right.
> > Really, i have never seen a _single_ mainstream app where the use of
> > sched_yield() was the right choice.
> It can occasionally be an optimization. You may have a case where you
> can do something very efficiently if a lock is not held, but you
> cannot afford to wait for the lock to be released. So you check the
> lock, if it's held, you yield and then check again. If that fails,
> you do it the less optimal way (for example, dispatching it to a
> thread that *can* afford to wait).

at this point it's "use a futex" instead; once you're doing system
calls you might as well use the right one for what you're trying to
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: 2007-10-01 21:59    [W:0.134 / U:0.700 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site