On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 09:48:02PM +0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > Btw, you don't schedule the ksoftirqd thread if do_softirq() returns
> > from the 'if(in_interrupt())' check.
>
> ksoftirqd will not be switched to before the first schedule
> or ret form syscall, when softirqs
Hello!
> Btw, you don't schedule the ksoftirqd thread if do_softirq() returns
> from the 'if(in_interrupt())' check.
ksoftirqd will not be switched to before the first schedule
or ret form syscall, when softirqs will be processed in any case.
So, wake up in this case would be mistake.
> I
On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> The return path to user space checks for pending softirqs. A delay of
And it breaks the loop too if new softirq events become pending again in
background.
> 1/HZ is only possible if the cpu loops in kernel space without returning
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> your cpu_is_idle will return 0 in the need_resched != 0 check even if the cpu
> is idle (because of the -1 trick for avoiding the SMP-IPI to notify the cpu).
>
Fixed.
> The issue you are addressing is quite londstanding and it is not only related
> to the loop with
On Sun, Apr 08, 2001 at 11:35:36PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> I've attached a new patch:
>
> * cpu_is_idle() moved to
> * function uninlined due to header dependencies
> * cpu_is_idle() doesn't call do_softirq directly, instead the caller
> returns to schedule()
> * cpu_is_idle() exported
> > I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but optimizing the idle
> >code path is probably not that important ;-)
>
> Sure it is, in one way: how fast can you get back to work?
> (not OK to take a millisecond getting out of the idle loop)
2 short function calls instead of 2
> I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but optimizing the idle
> code path is probably not that important ;-)
Sure it is, in one way: how fast can you get back to work?
(not OK to take a millisecond getting out of the idle loop)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but optimizing the idle
code path is probably not that important ;-)
Sure it is, in one way: how fast can you get back to work?
(not OK to take a millisecond getting out of the idle loop)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but optimizing the idle
code path is probably not that important ;-)
Sure it is, in one way: how fast can you get back to work?
(not OK to take a millisecond getting out of the idle loop)
2 short function calls instead of 2 "if(current-need_resched)"
On Sun, Apr 08, 2001 at 11:35:36PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
I've attached a new patch:
* cpu_is_idle() moved to linux/pm.h
* function uninlined due to header dependencies
* cpu_is_idle() doesn't call do_softirq directly, instead the caller
returns to schedule()
* cpu_is_idle()
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
your cpu_is_idle will return 0 in the need_resched != 0 check even if the cpu
is idle (because of the -1 trick for avoiding the SMP-IPI to notify the cpu).
Fixed.
The issue you are addressing is quite londstanding and it is not only related
to the loop with an idle
On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
The return path to user space checks for pending softirqs. A delay of
And it breaks the loop too if new softirq events become pending again in
background.
1/HZ is only possible if the cpu loops in kernel space without returning
Hello!
Btw, you don't schedule the ksoftirqd thread if do_softirq() returns
from the 'if(in_interrupt())' check.
ksoftirqd will not be switched to before the first schedule
or ret form syscall, when softirqs will be processed in any case.
So, wake up in this case would be mistake.
I assume
On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 09:48:02PM +0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
Btw, you don't schedule the ksoftirqd thread if do_softirq() returns
from the 'if(in_interrupt())' check.
ksoftirqd will not be switched to before the first schedule
or ret form syscall, when softirqs will be
I've attached a new patch:
* cpu_is_idle() moved to
* function uninlined due to header dependencies
* cpu_is_idle() doesn't call do_softirq directly, instead the caller
returns to schedule()
* cpu_is_idle() exported for modules.
* docu updated.
I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but
I've attached a new patch:
* cpu_is_idle() moved to linux/pm.h
* function uninlined due to header dependencies
* cpu_is_idle() doesn't call do_softirq directly, instead the caller
returns to schedule()
* cpu_is_idle() exported for modules.
* docu updated.
I'd prefer to inline cpu_is_idle(), but
16 matches
Mail list logo
