Re: [patch] sched: fix scheduling latencies for !PREEMPT kernels

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 10:54, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Another thing, I don't mean this to sound like a rhetorical question,
> > but if we have a preemptible kernel, why is it a good idea to sprinkle
>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > cond_rescheds everywhere? Isn't this now the worst of both worlds? Why
> > would someone who really cares about latency not enable preempt?
> 
> two things:
> 
> 1) none of the big distros enables CONFIG_PREEMPT in their kernels - not
> even SuSE. This is pretty telling.
> 

I am not sure this means preemption is a bad idea, it just means there's
no point in enabling CONFIG_PREEMPT with the current kernel because it's
not enough of an improvement to make a difference for low latency
applications.

Lee

-
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/