Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:55:34 -0800 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PATCH] TTY patches for 2.6.33-git |
| |
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:58:44 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > We've had quite a bit of BKL work this merge-window. Maybe we'll > > even get rid of it one of these days. There are "only" about 600 > > instances of "lock_kernel()" in the tree right now ;) > > I tend to use unlock_kernel() as the metric. (as it's more precisely > greppable and it is also more indicative of the underlying complexity > of locking, as it gets used more in more complex scenarios)
another metric is... how many times do we take the BKL for some workload. (For example booting or compiling a kernel). A counter like "BKLs-per-second" would be nice to expose (and then we can track that number going up as a regression etc)
For me, a secondary metric would be "how many times do we depend on the magic auto-drop/reget behavior".. also easy to build a counter for.
-- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org
| |