[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: mm->mmap_sem

To: James Simmons <jsimmons@edgeglobal.com>
Subject: Re: mm->mmap_sem
From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 15:54:34 +0100 (BST)
Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>, Marcus Sundberg <erammsu@kieray1.p.y.ki.era.ericsson.se>, linux-mm@kvack.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9909292012290.31287-100000@imperial.edgeglobal.com>
References: <14322.39431.416869.698005@dukat.scot.redhat.com><Pine.LNX.4.10.9909292012290.31287-100000@imperial.edgeglobal.com>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org

Hi,

On Wed, 29 Sep 1999 20:17:01 -0400 (EDT), James Simmons
<jsimmons@edgeglobal.com> said:

> Yikes. I think the best solution is to just put the process that owns
> the framebuffer to be put to sleep just before accel engine access. Wake
> it up once its done. 

On SMP, that still requires inter-CPU interrupts to all processors in
the worst case, as the process may already be running elsewhere.  It
doesn't get around the IPI cost.

--Stephen
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/

References:
- Re: mm->mmap_sem
  - From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
- Re: mm->mmap_sem
  - From: James Simmons <jsimmons@edgeglobal.com>
- Re: mm->mmap_sem
  - From: James Simmons <jsimmons@edgeglobal.com>

Prev by Date: Re: mm->mmap_sem
Next by Date: Re: mm->mmap_sem
Prev by thread: Re: mm->mmap_sem
Next by thread: Re: mm->mmap_sem
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread