Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.8-rc4-O7

[Lee Revell]

On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 06:48, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ok, it seems the lock-break of the outer loop was not enough - the up to
> 1024 iterations in the inner loop can generate quite high latencies too.
> 

In some of the traces, like this one:

http://krustophenia.net/testresults.php?dataset=2.6.8-rc4-bk3-O7#/var/www/2.6.8-rc4-bk3-O7/mount_reiserfs_latency_trace.txt

there are calls to voluntary_resched.  How is this possible?  Does it
mean that we called voluntary_resched while holding a spinlock, where we
needed to call voluntary_preempt_lock(&foo_lock), and thus failed to
reschedule?

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/