Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:14:47 +0100 (CET) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable |
| |
Hi,
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002 yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> Nobody has answered my question about the conflict between SMP per-cpu caching > and preempt. Since NUMA is apparently the future of MP in the PC world and > the future of Linux servers, it's interesting to consider this tradeoff.
Preempt is a UP feature so far.
> Nobody has answered the question about how to make sure all processes > make progress with preempt.
The same way as without preempt.
> Nobody has clearly explained how to avoid what I claim to be the inevitable > result of preempt -- priority inheritance locks (not just semaphores). > What we have is some "we'll figure that out when we get to it".
So far you haven't given any reason, how preempt should lead to this. (If I missed something, please explain it in a way a mere mortal can understand it.)
> It's not even clear how preempt is supposed to interact with SCHED_FIFO.
The same way as without preempt.
More of other FUD deleted, Victor, could you please stop this?
bye, Roman
- 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/
| |