Re: 2.0.x SMP performances compared to 2.1.x

Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Tue, 1 Sep 1998 11:02:58 -0700 (PDT)

On 1 Sep 1998, Claude Gamache wrote:
>
> As suggested, we tried the function "sched_yield()" instead of
> "pause()" with kernel 2.1.119. Although, the function "sched_yield()"
> does not produce the desired behavior since "sched_yield()" does not
> wait for an interrupt. The function "pause()" waits until a new
> interrupt is raised to return. Should we use "sched_yield()" and then
> "pause()" ? Or should we use something else ?

It was my braindamage, pause() was fine, and obviously the correct thing
to do. I was confusing you guys with some other people that just wanted to
force a reschedule and keep going, and used sleep(0) rather than pause for
that..

Which still leaves me with no clue on how to fix it, because I have no
test-case. Can you make your program available to me (I'm really nervous
about getting binaries over the internet, and you may be nervous about
making sources available, but maybe we can do something where I promise to
not show them to anybody else and delete them after I've used them?)

Linus

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html