lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8.1-P1

* Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:

> > + touch_preempt_timing();
> > while ((readb(ioaddr + MIICmd) & 0x40) && --boguscnt > 0)
> > ;
> > + touch_preempt_timing();
> >
> > assuming that the latencies still show up even if delimited like this.
> > (note that this only changes the way the latency is tracked - the
> > latency itself is still there so this isnt a fix.)
> >
>
> Sure, but, what would this accomplish, if the latency is still there?
> Are we just trying to track down exactly where in the network driver
> this is triggered?

yeah. If it's the first chunk then we could perhaps avoid it by doing it
outside of the lock.

Ingo
-
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 14:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans