On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 09:14:30 +1100
Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > It can be done cleanly if you encapsulate it properly.
>
> Sure, but what is the advantage to using a static branch? When would
> you ever want a single kernel image that could run either way
> depending on what machine it was
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:04:15PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:38:43 -0500
> "Suresh E. Warrier" wrote:
>
> > > But for now, what can be done is to have
> > > a flag that is set that will implement this or not. Using
> > > static_branch() to implement it such that when
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:38:43 -0500
"Suresh E. Warrier" wrote:
> > But for now, what can be done is to have
> > a flag that is set that will implement this or not. Using
> > static_branch() to implement it such that when its off it has no effect.
> >
>
> Are you recommending that for now I use
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:38:43 -0500
Suresh E. Warrier warr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
But for now, what can be done is to have
a flag that is set that will implement this or not. Using
static_branch() to implement it such that when its off it has no effect.
Are you recommending that
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:04:15PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:38:43 -0500
Suresh E. Warrier warr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
But for now, what can be done is to have
a flag that is set that will implement this or not. Using
static_branch() to implement it
On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 09:14:30 +1100
Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org wrote:
It can be done cleanly if you encapsulate it properly.
Sure, but what is the advantage to using a static branch? When would
you ever want a single kernel image that could run either way
depending on what machine it
On 03/24/2015 06:19 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:10:05 -0500
>
..
..
> There is no architecture where disabling interrupts is cheap. Actually,
> enabling them is the killer. Doing function tracing shows the impact of
> this rather well, as it would disable and enable
On 03/24/2015 06:19 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:10:05 -0500
..
..
There is no architecture where disabling interrupts is cheap. Actually,
enabling them is the killer. Doing function tracing shows the impact of
this rather well, as it would disable and enable interrupts
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:10:05 -0500
> Although the ring buffer design is coded to avoid disabling
> interrupts, in this case there does not appear to be a practical way
> to solve this problem without disabling interrupts for a short time.
> To accommodate those architectures where disabling
When tracing the behavior of multiple fio jobs running in parallel
our performance team observed that some scsi_dispatch_cmd_done events
appeared to occur earlier, often several microseconds earlier, than
their associated scsi_dispatch_cmd_start event in the trace records.
Other interrupt events
When tracing the behavior of multiple fio jobs running in parallel
our performance team observed that some scsi_dispatch_cmd_done events
appeared to occur earlier, often several microseconds earlier, than
their associated scsi_dispatch_cmd_start event in the trace records.
Other interrupt events
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:10:05 -0500
Although the ring buffer design is coded to avoid disabling
interrupts, in this case there does not appear to be a practical way
to solve this problem without disabling interrupts for a short time.
To accommodate those architectures where disabling
12 matches
Mail list logo
