Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8.1-P0 | From | Lee Revell <> | Date | Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:15:19 -0400 |
| |
On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 00:51, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> seems we need a lock-break in the innermost loop of copy_page_range(). > That loop processes up to 1024 pages currently, before the lock-break in > the outer loop happens. Large GUI processes are more likely to have full > 4MB regions mapped & populated. > > i suspect you could trigger a similarly bad latency by doing a fork() in > mlockall-test.cc - the attached mlockall-test2.cc does this. Do you get > bad latencies? >
Yes, mlockall-test2 with 10+MB of memory produces a 200us-3ms xrun about half the time.
Lee
- 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/
| |