On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 08:30:55AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
> > "Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > + while (!startwriters)
> > > + barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > + while (!startwriters)
> > + barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */
>
> one wonders whether a cpu_relax() would be a bit nicer
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ while (!startwriters)
+ barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */
one wonders whether a cpu_relax() would be a bit nicer here. That
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 08:30:55AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ while (!startwriters)
+ barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */
one
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + while (!startwriters)
> + barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */
one wonders whether a cpu_relax() would be a bit nicer here. That implicitly
does a barrier().
This patch
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
Paul E. McKenney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ while (!startwriters)
+ barrier(); /* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */
one wonders whether a cpu_relax() would be a bit nicer here. That implicitly
does a barrier().
This patch doesn't
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Of late, the scheduler seems to have decided to make things too easy for
> RCU -- on some configurations, all of the rcutorture tasks end up on the
> same CPU, which doesn't do a very good job of torturing RCU. This patch
> helps the scheduler spread these tasks out by
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Of late, the scheduler seems to have decided to make things too easy for
RCU -- on some configurations, all of the rcutorture tasks end up on the
same CPU, which doesn't do a very good job of torturing RCU. This patch
helps the scheduler spread these tasks out by
Of late, the scheduler seems to have decided to make things too easy for
RCU -- on some configurations, all of the rcutorture tasks end up on the
same CPU, which doesn't do a very good job of torturing RCU. This patch
helps the scheduler spread these tasks out by forcing a 20-millisecond
burst of
Of late, the scheduler seems to have decided to make things too easy for
RCU -- on some configurations, all of the rcutorture tasks end up on the
same CPU, which doesn't do a very good job of torturing RCU. This patch
helps the scheduler spread these tasks out by forcing a 20-millisecond
burst of
10 matches
Mail list logo