[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable
On January 13, 2002 04:36 pm, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 04:18:29PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > What somehow got lost in this discussion, that both patches don't
> > necessarily conflict with each other, they both attack the same problem
> > with different approaches, which complement each other. I prefer to get
> > the best of both patches.
> If you do this (and I've seen the results of doing both at once vs only
> either of then vs pure) then there's NO benifit for the preemption left.

Sorry, that's incorrect. I stated why earlier in this thread and akpm signed
off on it. With preempt you get ASAP (i.e., as soon as the outermost
spinlock is done) process scheduling. With hand-coded scheduling points you
get 'as soon as it happens to hit a scheduling point'.

That is not the only benefit, just the most obvious one.

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: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.206 / U:3.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site