Re: [this_cpu_xx V5 19/19] SLUB: Experimental new fastpath w/ointerrupt disable

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:31 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra (peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 08:46 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > * local_irq_restore
> > >   -> the interrupt line is low. The scheduler won't be called. There is
> > >      no preempt_check_resched() call.
> > 
> > That would be an issue with all irq disable sections, so I don't think
> > this is actually true.
> > 
> 
> AFAIK, irq disable sections rely on the fact that if you get a timer
> interrupt during this section, the timer interrupt line stays triggered
> for the duration of the irqoff section. Therefore, when interrupts are
> re-enabled, the interrupt kicks in, so does the scheduler.
> 
> This is not the case with the preempt/irqoff dance proposed by
> Christoph.

Ah, you're quite right indeed.

--
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/