Re: [RFC][PATCH] TIMER_BH-less smptimers

From: Dipankar Sarma (dipankar@in.ibm.com)
Date: Mon May 20 2002 - 07:38:20 EST

On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 06:55:00PM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
> Hi Dipankar,
>
> > I have been experimenting with Ingo's smptimers and I ended up
> > extending it a little bit. I would really appreciate comments
> > on whether these things make sense or not.
>
> I tried it out and found that we were context switching like crazy.
> It seems we were always running the timers out of a tasklet because
> we never unlocked the net_bh_lock.

Ok, here is the fixed smptimers patch (with the changes I mentioned
in the earlier mail). Hopefully the goto lock unwinding logic
in run_local_timer() and run_timer_tasklet() are not messed up
this time around.

We need to change bust_spinlocks() to bust that CPUs
timer base lock instead, though.

Thanks 

-- 
Dipankar Sarma  <dipankar@in.ibm.com> http://lse.sourceforge.net
Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 23 2002 - 22:00:19 EST