This message generated a parse failure. Raw output follows here. Please use 'back' to navigate. From devnull@lkml.org Sun May 28 06:28:09 2023 Received: from spaans.ds9a.nl (adsl-xs4all.ds9a.nl [213.84.159.51]) by kylie.puddingonline.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g8IF31X31167 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 17:03:01 +0200 Received: (qmail 6418 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2002 06:56:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO spaans.ds9a.nl) (3ffe:8280:10:360:202:44ff:fe2a:a1dd) by mayo.ipv6.ds9a.nl with SMTP; 18 Sep 2002 06:56:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 16167 invoked by uid 1000); 17 Sep 2002 20:31:31 -0000 Received: (maildatabase); juh Received: (qmail 2098 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2001 06:53:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 2092 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2001 06:53:53 -0000 Received: from vvtp.tn.tudelft.nl (HELO vvtp.nl) (qmailr@130.161.252.29) by spaans.ds9a.nl with SMTP; 6 Oct 2001 06:53:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 19284 invoked by uid 2547); 6 Oct 2001 06:53:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 19075 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2001 06:53:45 -0000 Received: from vger.kernel.org (199.183.24.194) by vvtp.tn.tudelft.nl with SMTP; 6 Oct 2001 06:53:45 -0000 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 02:52:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 02:52:07 -0400 Received: from cc361913-a.flrtn1.occa.home.com ([24.0.193.171]:34698 "EHLO mirai.cx") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 6 Oct 2001 02:52:01 -0400 Received: from pobox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mirai.cx (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f966qSw10125 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 23:52:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3BBEAA2C.1005F7F4@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 23:52:28 -0700 From: J Sloan Organization: J S Concepts X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.11-pre3 i686) X-Accept-Language: en Mime-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel Subject: [Fwd: low-latency patches] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------4B64C68D36B8947D0D231DD3" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/) X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------4B64C68D36B8947D0D231DD3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------4B64C68D36B8947D0D231DD3 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <3BBEAA0B.C990D2E7@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 23:51:55 -0700 From: J Sloan Organization: J S Concepts X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.11-pre3 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bob McElrath Subject: Re: low-latency patches References: <20011006010519.A749@draal.physics.wisc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob McElrath wrote: > It seems there are two low-latency projects out there. The one by Robert Love: > http://tech9.net/rml/linux/ > and the original one: > http://www.uow.edu.au/~andrewm/linux/schedlat.html > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the former uses spinlocks to know when it can > preempt the kernel, and the latter just tries to reduce latency by adding > (un)conditional_schedule and placing it at key places in the kernel? > > My questions are: > 1) Which of these two projects has better latency performance? Has anyone > benchmarked them against each other? > 2) Will either of these ever be merged into Linus' kernel (2.5?) > 3) Is there a possibility that either of these will make it to non-x86 > platforms? (for me: alpha) The second patch looks like it would > straightforwardly work on any arch, but the config.in for it is only in > arch/i386. Robert Love's patches would need some arch-specific asm... In my experience with them, the Andrew Morton patches provide a "smoother" interactive feel, great for things like online gaming (quake 3 arena, etc), however the Robert Love patches are simpler, seem less intrusive, and I've had better luck with them on smp, highmem boxes. (just IMHO) I like Andrew's patches on (up) workstations, and Robert's on (smp) servers, with some grey area of overlap - I'm hardly the person to say, but the rml patches would seem more likely to go in sooner, if at all. I'd love to see both remain an option. cu jjs --------------4B64C68D36B8947D0D231DD3-- - 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/