From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261757AbTHYMVo (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:21:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261761AbTHYMVo (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:21:44 -0400 Received: from c210-49-248-224.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:56255 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261757AbTHYMVl convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:21:41 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: mru@users.sourceforge.net (=?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=20Rullg=E5rd?=), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH]O18.1int Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:28:37 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <200308231555.24530.kernel@kolivas.org> <200308252137.06060.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308252228.37937.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:58, Måns Rullgård wrote: > Con Kolivas writes: > >> >> Vanilla test1 has the spin effect. Test2 doesn't. I haven't tried > >> >> vanilla test3 or test4. As I've said, the O16.2-O16.3 patch > >> >> introduced the problem. With that patch reversed, everything is > >> >> fine. What problem does that patch fix? > >> > > >> > It's a generic fix for priority inversion but it induces badness in > >> > smp, and latency in task preemption on up so it's not suitable. > >> > >> Now I'm confused. If that patch is bad, then why is it in O18? > > > > No, the 16.2 patch is bad. 16.3 backed it out. > > OK, but it somehow made XEmacs behave badly. Well it was a generic fix in 16.2 that helped XEmacs as I said. O15 also had a generic fix (child not preempting it's parent) but that too was covering up the real issue, but it wasnt as drastic as 16.2. Con