Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: [announce] [patch] Voluntary KernelPreemption Patch

[Andrew Morton]

Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  if you're scared that there are too many cond_resched (I'm not scared
>  and people should enable them anyways if they make a difference, they
>  still should be less than the number of spin_unlocks with preempt
>  enabled), then you should add a cond_resched_costly and add a config
>  option that turns it off.

None of these approaches improves worst-case latency at all on SMP.  If
we're not going to address the SMP problem we could just make it UP-only,
in which case increased locking costs are a non-issue.

I'd prefer that we find a solution for SMP too though.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/