lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8.1-P2

* Thomas Charbonnel <thomas@undata.org> wrote:

> When entering check_preempt_timing, preempt_thresh was 0, and
> preempt_max_latency had been freshly reset to 100. It should have
> triggered this code :
>
> if (latency < preempt_max_latency)
> goto out;
>
> but for some reason it didn't (or there is a problem in the tracing
> code, not showing events that would have increased 'latency').

there is one case where we could 'miss' a new latency: when
/proc/latency_trace is accessed. For the duration of /proc/latency_trace
access, the updating of the max latency is stopped:

if (down_trylock(&max_mutex))
goto out;

this is not really a practical problem and fixing it would be quite
complex.

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    [W:0.327 / U:0.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site