From: Jason K. <ja...@ke...> - 2001-12-03 02:34:07
|
I have the pre-empt patch installe don my base machine here, and have never really noticed much of a difference in response time. Would this make more of an effect in the dreamcast for some reason? On December 2, 2001 9:53 pm, Robert Love wrote: > I also want to mention that we have a version of the preemptible kernel > for the SH arch now, and it seems to run lovely on the Dreamcast. > > It is available at: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml/sh/preempt-kernel-sh-2.4 >.16-1.patch > > You will also need the base preempt-kernel patch at: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml/preempt-kernel/v2.4/pree >mpt-kernel-rml-2.4.16-1.patch > > And a recent SH tree. The "linux" module in CVS at > http://sf.net/projects/linuxsh was recently updated to 2.4.16. > Alternatively, here is a patch to bring 2.4.16 in sync with the SH tree: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml/sh/sh-update-rml-2.4.16- >1.patch > > There is a bit of information about the preemptible kernel at > http://tech9.net/rml/linux as well as LWN, slashdot, etc. Basically, > the current linux kernel does not allow processes to be preempted when > operating inside the kernel. I.e., kernel calls run until completion -- > this implies that even if task A needs to run, if task B is running and > in the kernel, task A won't be scheduled until task A is done. The > degradation this causes to latency and system response is clear. > Further, however, since with the preempt-kernel patch I/O-bound tasks > are scheduled as-soon-as I/O is available, throughput tends to increase, > too. We are aiming at inclusion in 2.5. > > Its pretty neat. If nothing else, tell your friends you have a fully > preemptible Dreamcast. Or something. > > Comments and feedback is welcome, > > Robert Love > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxdc-dev mailing list > Lin...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxdc-dev |