On Wed 2008-06-18 09:55:18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Marin Mitov <mitov@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Why not something like that (do keep in mind I am not an expert :-):
> >
> > static void delay_tsc(unsigned long loops)
> > {
> > get and store the mask of allowed cpus;
> > /* prevent the migration */
> > set the mask of allowed cpus to the current cpu only;
> > /* is it possible? could it be guaranteed? */
> > loop for the delay;
> > restore the old mask of allowed cpus;
> > }
> >
> > You have got the idea. Could it be realized? Is it more expensive than
> > the current realization? So, comments, please.
>
> hm, changing/saving/restorig cpus_allowed is really considered a 'heavy'
> operation compared to preempt_disable(). On a 4096 CPUs box cpus_allowed
> is 4096 bits which is half a kilobyte ...
Time to RLE the bitmap?
<runs> Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
