[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP
From: Wenji Wu <>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:56:58 -0600

> >We could also pepper tcp_recvmsg() with some very carefully placed
> >preemption disable/enable calls to deal with this even with
> >CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled.
> I also think about this approach. But since the "problem" happens in
> the 2.6 Desktop and Low-latency Desktop (not server), system
> responsiveness is a key feature, simply placing preemption
> disabled/enable call might not work. If you want to place
> preemption disable/enable calls within tcp_recvmsg, you have to put
> them in the very beginning and end of the call. Disabling preemption
> would degrade system responsiveness.

We can make explicitl preemption checks in the main loop of
tcp_recvmsg(), and release the socket and run the backlog if
need_resched() is TRUE.

This is the simplest and most elegant solution to this problem.

The one suggested in your patch and paper are way overkill, there is
no reason to solve a TCP specific problem inside of the generic
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-11-30 03:23    [W:0.068 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site