From: Wenji Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:56:58 -0600
> >We could also pepper tcp_recvmsg() with some very carefully placed > >preemption disable/enable calls to deal with this even with > >CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled. > > I also think about this approach. But since the "problem" happens in > the 2.6 Desktop and Low-latency Desktop (not server), system > responsiveness is a key feature, simply placing preemption > disabled/enable call might not work. If you want to place > preemption disable/enable calls within tcp_recvmsg, you have to put > them in the very beginning and end of the call. Disabling preemption > would degrade system responsiveness. We can make explicitl preemption checks in the main loop of tcp_recvmsg(), and release the socket and run the backlog if need_resched() is TRUE. This is the simplest and most elegant solution to this problem. The one suggested in your patch and paper are way overkill, there is no reason to solve a TCP specific problem inside of the generic scheduler. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
