| |||||||||||||
BSDBSDPosted Jul 6, 2011 14:45 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: BSD by trasz Parent article: Interview with Lennart Poettering (LinuxFR.org)
256 point sync is barely measurable?? Wow, what hardware do you have?
Preemption contributes to latency. That's usually a problem, not a solution.
(Log in to post comments)
BSD Posted Jul 6, 2011 14:49 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
I don't mean to ignite a preemption discussion. My point is only that "just fix it with preemption" is oversimplified and probably won't work.
BSD Posted Jul 6, 2011 18:25 UTC (Wed) by trasz (guest, #45786) [Link]
Could you explain what's the "256 point sync" and how is it related to the preemptiveness of the kernel?
BSD Posted Jul 6, 2011 20:49 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
oops, I meant sinc of course. Finger habits. Decent quality sinc takes a good chunk of your CPU.
The bit about preemption is a reply to your statement:
> And the kernel is preemptible, so it wouldn't matter much anyway
|
|||||||||||||