[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [GIT PATCH] TTY patches for 2.6.33-git
    On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:58:44 +0100
    Ingo Molnar <> wrote:

    > * Linus Torvalds <> wrote:
    > > We've had quite a bit of BKL work this merge-window. Maybe we'll
    > > even get rid of it one of these days. There are "only" about 600
    > > instances of "lock_kernel()" in the tree right now ;)
    > I tend to use unlock_kernel() as the metric. (as it's more precisely
    > greppable and it is also more indicative of the underlying complexity
    > of locking, as it gets used more in more complex scenarios)

    another metric is... how many times do we take the BKL for some
    workload. (For example booting or compiling a kernel).
    A counter like "BKLs-per-second" would be nice to expose
    (and then we can track that number going up as a regression etc)

    For me, a secondary metric would be "how many times do we depend on the
    magic auto-drop/reget behavior".. also easy to build a counter for.

    Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
    For development, discussion and tips for power savings,

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-13 18:57    [W:0.020 / U:155.568 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site