From: "kus Kusche Klaus" <kus@keba.com>
To: "Evgeniy Polyakov" <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>
Cc: "John Ronciak" <john.ronciak@gmail.com>,
"Adrian Bunk" <bunk@stusta.de>,
"Lee Revell" <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <john.ronciak@intel.com>,
<ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com>, <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: RE: My vote against eepro* removal
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:19:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AAD6DA242BC63C488511C611BD51F367323325@MAILIT.keba.co.at> (raw)
From: Evgeniy Polyakov
> Each MDIO read can take upto 2 msecs (!) and at least 20
> usecs in e100,
> and this runs in timer handler.
> Concider attaching (only compile tested) patch which moves
> e100 watchdog
> into workqueue.
Hmmm, I don't think moving it around is worth the trouble
(nevertheless, I will test later if I find time).
For a full preemption kernel, both timer code and workqueue code
are executed in a thread of their own. If I know that there is a
500 us piece of code in either of them, I have to adjust the prio
of the corresponding thread (and all others) accordingly anyway.
For a non-full preemption kernel, your patch moves the 500 us
piece of code from kernel to thread context, so it really
improves things. But is 500 us something to worry about in a
non-full preemption kernel?
--
Klaus Kusche (Software Development - Control Systems)
KEBA AG Gewerbepark Urfahr, A-4041 Linz, Austria (Europe)
Tel: +43 / 732 / 7090-3120 Fax: +43 / 732 / 7090-6301
E-Mail: kus@keba.com WWW: www.keba.com
next reply other threads:[~2006-01-20 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-20 10:19 kus Kusche Klaus [this message]
2006-01-20 11:02 ` My vote against eepro* removal Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:45 ` Lee Revell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-24 7:38 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 11:01 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-23 20:23 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-20 11:27 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 10:51 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 11:05 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-20 9:37 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-20 9:55 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2006-01-21 0:40 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 1:19 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 1:30 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 2:01 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-21 3:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-19 10:26 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 16:20 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-01-19 17:16 ` John Ronciak
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-19 22:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-19 10:08 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 7:19 kus Kusche Klaus
2006-01-19 7:24 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-19 7:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
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=AAD6DA242BC63C488511C611BD51F367323325@MAILIT.keba.co.at \
--to=kus@keba.com \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@gmail.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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 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).