LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Gregory Haskins" <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: "Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, <mingo@elte.hu>, <bill.huey@gmail.com>,
	<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <kevin@hilman.org>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<cminyard@mvista.com>, <dsingleton@mvista.com>,
	<dwalker@mvista.com>, "Moiz Kohari" <MKohari@novell.com>,
	"Peter Morreale" <PMorreale@novell.com>,
	"Sven Dietrich" <SDietrich@novell.com>, <dsaxena@plexity.net>,
	<acme@redhat.com>, <ak@suse.de>, <gregkh@suse.de>,
	<npiggin@suse.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 6/9] add a loop counter based timeout mechanism
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:09:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <47C3E558.BA47.005A.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080225220601.GH2659@elf.ucw.cz>

>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at  5:06 PM, in message
<20080225220601.GH2659@elf.ucw.cz>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote: 
> 
> I believe you have _way_ too many config variables. If this can be set
> at runtime, does it need a config option, too?

Generally speaking, I think until this algorithm has an adaptive-timeout in addition to an adaptive-spin/sleep, these .config based defaults are a good idea.  Sometimes setting these things at runtime are a PITA when you are talking about embedded systems that might not have/want a nice userspace sysctl-config infrastructure.  And changing the defaults in the code is unattractive for some users.  I don't think its a big deal either way, so if people hate the config options, they should go.  But I thought I would throw this use-case out there to ponder.

Regards,
-Greg


  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-02-26 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-02-25 16:00 [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 0/9] adaptive real-time locks Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:00 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 1/9] allow rt-mutex lock-stealing to include lateral priority Gregory Haskins
2008-03-03 15:13   ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-03 15:41     ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 1/9] allow rt-mutex lock-stealing to includelateral priority Gregory Haskins
2008-03-03 15:55       ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-03 15:55         ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 1/9] allow rt-mutex lock-stealing toincludelateral priority Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:00 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 21:53   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-25 22:57     ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2008-02-25 23:00       ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-25 23:40         ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2008-02-26  1:15       ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:00 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 3/9] rearrange rt_spin_lock sleep Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 21:54   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-26  0:45     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:00 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 4/9] optimize rt lock wakeup Gregory Haskins
2008-03-03 15:37   ` Steven Rostedt
2008-03-03 15:41     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:01 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 5/9] adaptive real-time lock support Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 22:03   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-26  0:48     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-26 15:03     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-26 18:06       ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-26 18:01         ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:01 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 6/9] add a loop counter based timeout mechanism Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 22:06   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-25 22:19     ` Greg KH
2008-02-25 22:21       ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-25 22:39     ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2008-02-26 15:09     ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2008-02-25 16:01 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 7/9] adaptive mutexes Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 22:09   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-26  0:52     ` Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 16:01 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 8/9] adjust pi_lock usage in wakeup Gregory Haskins
2008-02-25 22:10   ` Pavel Machek
2008-02-25 16:01 ` [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 9/9] remove the extra call to try_to_take_lock Gregory Haskins

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=47C3E558.BA47.005A.0@novell.com \
    --to=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=MKohari@novell.com \
    --cc=PMorreale@novell.com \
    --cc=SDietrich@novell.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=bill.huey@gmail.com \
    --cc=cminyard@mvista.com \
    --cc=dsaxena@plexity.net \
    --cc=dsingleton@mvista.com \
    --cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=kevin@hilman.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 6/9] add a loop counter based timeout mechanism' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).