Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Sep 2004 02:57:23 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |