From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753170Ab3H1J3s (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 05:29:48 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com ([74.125.83.54]:33567 "EHLO mail-ee0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752446Ab3H1J3r (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 05:29:47 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:29:43 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andi Kleen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: Improve preempt-scheduling and x86 user access v3 Message-ID: <20130828092943.GA14094@gmail.com> References: <1376687844-19857-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1376687844-19857-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andi Kleen wrote: > Various optimizations related to CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY and x86 > uaccess Looks mostly good. Does this patchset change the number of cond_resched() preemption points on CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y, or is it a scheduling invariant? Thanks, Ingo