lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] sched: fix scheduling latencies for !PREEMPT kernels
* William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:
>> The code we're most worried is buggy, not just nonperformant.

On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 11:56:14AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> what code do you mean? The one i know about and which Lee is referring
> to above is the 6-lines tty unlocking change - the one which Alan
> objected to rightfully. I've zapped it from my tree.
> (nobody objected to the original thread on lkml weeks ago where the tty
> unlocking change was proposed, implemented, alpha-tested and beta-tested
> in -mm for several releases - that's why it showed up in my 20+
> latency-reduction patches.)
> No latency changes to the tty layer until someone fixes its locking. End
> of story.

I had the buggy code being associated with BKL use in mind as a motive
for the BKL sweeps etc., and wasn't referring to any pending changes.


-- wli
-
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 14:06    [W:0.172 / U:0.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site