Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:19:29 -0700 (PDT) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] Create rebalance_domains from rebalance_tick |
| |
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > While we are at it: Take the opportunity to avoid taking > > the request queue lock in wake_priority_sleeper if > > there are no running processes. > > Can you split this out? It is good without the tasklet based > rebalancing.
Sure next rollup will have this:
Avoid taking the rq lock in wake_priority sleeper
Avoid taking the request queue lock in wake_priority_sleeper if there are no running processes.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Index: linux-2.6.19-rc3/kernel/sched.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.19-rc3.orig/kernel/sched.c 2006-10-26 11:13:29.000000000 -0500 +++ linux-2.6.19-rc3/kernel/sched.c 2006-10-26 11:16:44.896476659 -0500 @@ -2900,6 +2900,9 @@ static inline int wake_priority_sleeper( int ret = 0; #ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_SMT + if (!rq->nr_running) + return 0; + spin_lock(&rq->lock); /* * If an SMT sibling task has been put to sleep for priority - 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/
| |