Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:42:18 -0500 (CDT) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [bisected] pre-3.16 regression on open() scalability |
| |
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I still think it's totally the wrong direction to pollute so > many fast paths with this obscure debugging check workaround > unconditionally. > > cond_resched() is in EVERY sleeping lock and in EVERY memory allocation! > And these are really critical paths for many workloads. > > If you really wanted to do this I think you would first need > to define a cond_resched_i_am_not_fast() or somesuch. > > Or put it all behind some debugging ifdef.
Again I am fully on Andi's side here. Please remove these frequent calls to cond_resched. If one wants a fully preemptable kernel then please use CONFIG_PREEMPT.
| |