Re: [bisected] pty performance problem

[Ingo Molnar]

* Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > diff --git a/drivers/char/tty_buffer.c b/drivers/char/tty_buffer.c
> > index 66fa4e1..92a0864 100644
> > --- a/drivers/char/tty_buffer.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/tty_buffer.c
> > @@ -495,7 +495,7 @@ void tty_flip_buffer_push(struct tty_struct *tty)
> >  	if (tty->low_latency)
> >  		flush_to_ldisc(&tty->buf.work.work);
> >  	else
> > -		schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 1);
> > +		schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 0);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_flip_buffer_push);
> 
> Another possibility is to do
> 
> 	if (tty->low_latency)
> 		schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 0);
> 	else
> 		schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 1);

Flaggery for low latency is kind of lame though - especially if it 
defaults to off in most drivers as you say.

	Ingo
--
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/