lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, plist fixes
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>
> * Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:
>
> > For me it's strictly a speed question. I was reviewing
> > V0.7.40-04 and it looks like apples and oranges to me. It's more a
> > question of where do you perfer the latency , in up() or in down() ..
> > plist is slower for non-RT tasks, but non-RT tasks also get the
> > benefit of priority ordering.
>
> what benefit do non-RT tasks get from plists, compared to the ordered
> list? Non-RT tasks are not PI handled in any way.

The original wait list was partial ordered, wasn't it? RT tasks on the
front, non-RT at the back. Now the whole list is sorted (including non RT
tasks) . So non-RT task will get the lock in priority sorted order, as
opposed to just random. Like you said, there is no PI done.


Daniel

-
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: 2005-06-06 16:54    [W:0.646 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site