lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux-2.4.5
On Sat, 26 May 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> > > - /*
> > > - * Set our state for sleeping, then check again for buffer heads.
> > > - * This ensures we won't miss a wake_up from an interrupt.
> > > - */
> > > - wait_event(buffer_wait, nr_unused_buffer_heads >= MAX_BUF_PER_PAGE);
> > > + current->policy |= SCHED_YIELD;
> > > + __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
> > > + schedule();
> > > goto try_again;
> > > }

I'm still curious ... is it _really_ needed to busy-spin here?

I've seen some big problems with processes eating CPU time
while not getting any work done and am slowly trying to
eliminate those places in the VM by waiting on things.

Is it really needed to introduce a new busy-wait place in the
kernel?

regards,

Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.062 / U:0.840 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site