Re: [PATCH] mm, vmstat: Use cond_resched only when !CONFIG_PREEMPT

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Tue, 31 May 2011 09:13:47 +0600
Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 5:38 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 May 2011 22:59:04 +0600
> > Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> commit 468fd62ed9 (vmstats: add cond_resched() to refresh_cpu_vm_stats()) added cond_resched() in refresh_cpu_vm_stats. Purpose of that patch was to allow other threads to run in non-preemptive case. This patch, makes sure that cond_resched() gets called when !CONFIG_PREEMPT is set. In a preemptiable kernel we don't need to call cond_resched().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Hmm, what benefit do we get by adding this extra #ifdef in the code directly ?
> > Other cond_resched() callers are not guilty in !CONFIG_PREEMPT ?
> >
> Well, in preemptible kernel this context will get preempted if
> requires, so we don't need cond_resched(). If you checkout the git log
> of the mentioned commit, you'll find the explanation. It says:
>         "Adding a cond_resched() to allow other threads to run in the
> non-preemptive
>     case."
> 

IOW, my question is "why only this cond_resched() should be fixed ?"
What's bad with all cond_resched() in the kernel as no-op in CONFIG_PREEMPT ?

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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/