Re: [bisected] pty performance problem

[Ingo Molnar]

* Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > 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.
> 
> So you'd prefer to detect devices that are byte based or message based 
> by what method ?

I'd not delay the worklet by default - i.e. i'd do Mike's patch.

Havent tested all effects of it though - do you have any estimation 
about negative effects from such a change? We do have hard numbers 
(latencies in the millisecs range) from the opposite direction and those 
numbers arent pretty.

	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/