Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:19:30 -0500 (EST) | From | William Montgomery <> | Subject | Re: lowlatency-2.2.14-B1 + 2.2.14aa7 fixes crash, but... |
| |
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> This is the diff for the free_inode conditional schedule. The spin_unlock > thing probably couldn't harm since such code is all under the big kernel > lock too in 2.2.x. > [snip...] > list_entry(tmp, struct inode, i_list)->i_state = I_FREEING; > found++; > + > + if (current->need_resched && !resched) { > + INODE(tmp)->i_count++; > + spin_unlock(&inode_lock); > + > + schedule(); > + iput(INODE(tmp)); > + > + spin_lock(&inode_lock); > + resched = 1; > + goto again; > + } > } > > return found;
Why did you move the resched code out of the "if (!CAN_UNUSE(INODE(tmp)))" conditional? Won't that make the code less likely to be executed and increase scheduling latency?
Wm
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |