All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
	Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
	Joe Thornber <ejt@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] dm: Remove dm_bufio_cond_resched()
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 11:13:22 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1609231111010.5640@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160923090524.GE5008@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:00:37AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > It is, might_sleep() implies might_resched(). In fact, that's all what
> > > PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is, make the might_sleep() debug test imply a resched
> > > point.
> > 
> > Grr, how intuitive - NOT!
> 
> No, it actually makes sense. Because you 'obviously' only call
> might_sleep() in contexts that should be able to sleep (if not, it'll
> holler). So they're already placed right for preemption.

I disagree. might_sleep() is commonly known as a debug mechanism and it
existed before the preemption stuff went in. So the easy way to sprinkle
preemption points into the kernel was to hijack might_sleep(). I know it's
historical, but that doesnt make it any more intuitive.

Thanks,

	tglx

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-23  9:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-13  8:45 [RFC][PATCH] dm: Remove dm_bufio_cond_resched() Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-13 12:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-09-13 13:39 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-09-19 10:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-22 20:53     ` Mikulas Patocka
2016-09-22 20:59       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-09-23  7:34         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-23  8:00           ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-09-23  9:05             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-23  9:13               ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2016-09-23  9:26                 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-09-23 12:17             ` Mike Galbraith
2016-09-23 12:26               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-23 12:39                 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-09-23 12:42                 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-09-23 12:46                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-23 14:32           ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2016-09-23 14:32             ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-19  9:49 ` Mikulas Patocka
2016-09-19 10:47   ` Peter Zijlstra

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=alpine.DEB.2.20.1609231111010.5640@nanos \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=ejt@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.