[lkml]   [1999]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    SubjectRe: [patch] new scheduler

    On Tue, 11 May 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > >> 1) there are no idle cpu in the system
    > >> 2) the prev task was in general the less priority one
    > >
    > >wrong. We actively _preempt_ processes on other CPUs, this means that a
    > If I understand well the only wrong thing I said is point (2). But if you
    > would read better my email I stated clearly that point (2) it not the pure
    > reality, but instead I said that it's a very good approximation of the
    > pure reality.
    > >preempted process has all rights to try to replace even lesser priority
    > >processes on other CPUs. Your problem might be that you are thinking in
    > You should rereadd my previous email. I never said it's useless, I have
    > said that it's not worthwile.

    it is always 'worthwile' to have a correct scheduler. This was the sole
    purpose of all the 2.2.8 scheduler changes!

    > You mean that a preemted process has all rights to preempt a even lesser
    > priority CPU. But ask you _why_ such process is been preempted. Simply
    > because in general we can see it as the _less_ priority one.

    not necesserily, it might as well just be replaced by a RT process ...

    > I repeat that as global design I prefer to have such call in schedule_tail
    > even if according to me it's only a performance _hit_.

    it is not a performance hit at all because most processes reschedule
    'voluntarily', ie. they get removed from the runqueue.

    There is one inconsistency left though, if the previous process was
    SCHED_YIELD then we should obviously not push it to other CPUs, because it
    has just given up it's timeslice. (the attached untested patch fixes this)

    -- mingo

    --- linux/kernel/sched.c.orig Tue May 11 13:29:39 1999
    +++ linux/kernel/sched.c Tue May 11 13:38:32 1999
    @@ -194,10 +194,8 @@
    static inline int prev_goodness (struct task_struct * prev,
    struct task_struct * p, int this_cpu)
    - if (p->policy & SCHED_YIELD) {
    - p->policy &= ~SCHED_YIELD;
    + if (p->policy & SCHED_YIELD)
    return 0;
    - }
    return goodness(prev, p, this_cpu);

    @@ -659,10 +657,16 @@
    static inline void __schedule_tail (struct task_struct *prev)
    + if (prev->policy & SCHED_YIELD)
    + prev->policy &= ~SCHED_YIELD;
    + else {
    +#ifdef __SMP__
    + if ((prev->state == TASK_RUNNING) &&
    + (prev != idle_task(smp_processor_id())))
    + reschedule_idle(prev);
    + }
    #ifdef __SMP__
    - if ((prev->state == TASK_RUNNING) &&
    - (prev != idle_task(smp_processor_id())))
    - reschedule_idle(prev);
    prev->has_cpu = 0;
    #endif /* __SMP__ */

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.025 / U:9.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site