Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: RT patch acceptance | From | Duncan Sands <> | Date | Fri, 27 May 2005 16:27:24 +0200 |
| |
> Yes, as Ingo stated many times, addition cond_resched() to > might_sleep() does achieve the "usable" latencies -- and obviously > that's hacky. > > So, the only question is whether changing (inserting) cond_resched() > to all points would be acceptable even if it results in a big amount > of changes...
Or change (almost) all calls to might_sleep() into calls to cond_reched(), and put a might_sleep() inside cond_reched().
Ciao,
D.
- 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/
| |