Re: [patch] lowlatency patch for 2.4, lowlatency-2.4.0-test6-B5

Date: Fri Aug 04 2000 - 09:38:43 EST

On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 03:43:15PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> *no*. There are places in the kernel that do work for millisecs while
> holding a spinlock. This causes millisec latencies even if we had a

The interesting question here is "why"? The only example ever discussed
here was copying data on big reads/writes and this seems like a classic
case of where the algorithm needs to be fixed -- if you have a millisecond
copy then you almost certainly would benefit from kiobufs or something smart.

Victor Yodaiken 
Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company.

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST