On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 11:59 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> So for the general horrible idea.
> Nacked-With-Extreme-Prejudice-by: "Eric W. Biederman"
Goody. I was surprised Peter didn't make it instantly dead.
-Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
On 03/25/2014 02:31 PM, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
Yes, it is indeed limited to a cooperating set of userspace
tasks/threads. Tasks/threads will explicitly choose to use this feature. It is a
no-op for every one else.
It is absolutely not a no-op for me if my task can't be scheduled soon
enou
Khalid Aziz writes:
> On 03/25/2014 12:59 PM, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>> Khalid Aziz writes:
>>
>>> This patch adds a way for a thread to request additional timeslice from
>>> the scheduler if it is about to be preempted, so it could complete any
>>> critical task it is in the middle of. ..
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:47:52PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> I am not sure if it would be practical and useful to integrate this
> into any of the standard locking interfaces, but I have not looked
> into it much either. My initial intent is to let individual apps
> decide if they could benefit f
On 03/25/2014 12:59 PM, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
Khalid Aziz writes:
This patch adds a way for a thread to request additional timeslice from
the scheduler if it is about to be preempted, so it could complete any
critical task it is in the middle of. ...
Let me see if I understand th
Khalid Aziz writes:
> This patch adds a way for a thread to request additional timeslice from
> the scheduler if it is about to be preempted, so it could complete any
> critical task it is in the middle of. This functionality helps with
> performance on databases and has been used for many years
On 03/25/2014 12:20 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
Khalid Aziz writes:
First it would be nice to have some standard reference lock library that
uses this. What would it take to support this in glibc?
I am not sure if it would be practical and useful to integrate this into
any of the standard locking
Khalid Aziz writes:
First it would be nice to have some standard reference lock library that
uses this. What would it take to support this in glibc?
> +==
> +Using the preemption delay feature
> +==
> +
> +This feature is enabled in
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 11:56:31 -0600 Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 03/25/2014 11:44 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > So the procfs file is written in binary format and is read back in
> > ascii format. Seems odd.
> >
> > Perhaps this should all be done as a new syscall rather than some
> > procfs thing.
> >
On 03/25/2014 11:44 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
So the procfs file is written in binary format and is read back in
ascii format. Seems odd.
Perhaps this should all be done as a new syscall rather than some
procfs thing.
I didn't want to add yet another syscall which will then need to be
added
On 03/25/2014 11:46 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/25, Khalid Aziz wrote:
fs/proc/base.c | 89
This code can be simplified, but the real question is why do we need it.
Just add PR_SET_PREEMPT_DELAY ?
Oleg.
I like this idea! Thanks.
--
Khali
On 03/25, Khalid Aziz wrote:
>
> fs/proc/base.c | 89
This code can be simplified, but the real question is why do we need it.
Just add PR_SET_PREEMPT_DELAY ?
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 11:17:50 -0600 Khalid Aziz wrote:
>
> This patch adds a way for a thread to request additional timeslice from
> the scheduler if it is about to be preempted, so it could complete any
> critical task it is in the middle of. This functionality helps with
> performance on databa
13 matches
Mail list logo
