Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: [announce] [patch] Voluntary Kernel Preemption Patch
From: Nick Piggin (nickpiggin_AT_yahoo.com.au)
Date: Thu Jul 22 2004 - 01:52:27 EEST
Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 09:32:46PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>What do you think about deferring softirqs just while in critical
>>sections?
>>
>>I'm not sure how well this works, and it is CONFIG_PREEMPT only
>>but in theory it should prevent unbounded softirqs while under
>>locks without taking the performance hit of doing the context
>>switch.
>
>
> You're still running do_softirq() with preemption disabled, which is
> almost as bad as doing it under a lock.
>
do_softirq is only run a maximum of once with preemption disabled,
instead of an unbounded number of times.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 30 2004 - 10:18:52 EEST