Hi,
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002 yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> Nobody has answered my question about the conflict between SMP per-cpu caching
> and preempt. Since NUMA is apparently the future of MP in the PC world and
> the future of Linux servers, it's interesting to consider this tradeoff.
Preempt is a UP feature so far.
> Nobody has answered the question about how to make sure all processes
> make progress with preempt.
The same way as without preempt.
> Nobody has clearly explained how to avoid what I claim to be the inevitable
> result of preempt -- priority inheritance locks (not just semaphores).
> What we have is some "we'll figure that out when we get to it".
So far you haven't given any reason, how preempt should lead to this.
(If I missed something, please explain it in a way a mere mortal can
understand it.)
> It's not even clear how preempt is supposed to interact with SCHED_FIFO.
The same way as without preempt.
More of other FUD deleted, Victor, could you please stop this?
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 15 2002 - 21:00:44 EST