From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263971AbTKZGHB (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:07:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263980AbTKZGHB (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:07:01 -0500 Received: from 5.86.35.65.cfl.rr.com ([65.35.86.5]:34433 "EHLO drunkencodepoets.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263971AbTKZGG7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:06:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:07:01 -0500 From: s0be To: Muli Ben-Yehuda Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] trivial change in kernel/sched.c in 2.6.0-test9+ Message-Id: <20031126010701.25600adb.s0be@mail.drunkencodepoets.com> In-Reply-To: <20031126055556.GC3734@actcom.co.il> References: <20031126002713.1f8707f8.paterley@mail.drunkencodepoets.com> <20031126055556.GC3734@actcom.co.il> Organization: drunkencodepoets.com X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > this ends up saving a few math operations any time a child > > process exits. ( calling sched_exit(task_t * p) ) > > Yes, but does it have any noticeable effect on performance whatsoever? > premature optimization, root of all evil, etc. I'm not on a system that I can take down long enough/crash testing right now that I could check this. And, to be honest, I can't think of anything other than a fork bomb that would do a good job of testing this. I just remembered helping con with O(3)int schedular hacks and he seemed concerned with how many math operations take place in sched.c due to it being in the core. If you can suggest a way to test this, I will test it on my system tomorrow. Pat Erley