On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, William Montgomery wrote:
>(mark_buffer_clean and mark_buffer_dirty) are modified in the lowlatency
>patch to be followed by a conditional_schedule. Why would this function
BUG -> mark_buffer_clean is never been supposed to be blocking! Remove the
conditional_schedule from there.
>not also need it? I only ask because the latency has increased from
You'd better not conditional schedule there since it's called with a
spinlock held ;).
>0.6ms to 1.4ms and I thought this might be the cause.
Yes I got your point but it sure isn't the problem.
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:20 EST