lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRE: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7


    On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Dimitris Michailidis wrote:
    >
    > On 28-Aug-2000 Linus Torvalds wrote:
    > > I think the right solution is to completely split up "schedule()" into two
    > > different functions (which just share 99% of the code), and basically have
    > > the idle thread call the _other_ schedule. The one that never does the
    > > test at all.
    >
    > Just to clarify, you're suggesting having a schedule_and_btw_current_is_idle
    > and calling this from cpu_idle(), right?

    Right.

    > In this case the two schedules
    > would share quite a bit less than 99% of the code. Idle tasks don't have to
    > deal with kernel lock, ->state, SCHED_YIELD and RT exhaustion, to name a few.

    Good point. Although it might be hard to sanely still share the actual
    code (I'd hate to get a bigger icache footprint, so I'd like the common
    code to be _truly_ common, not just on a source level).

    But it looks like the thing would work.

    Linus

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.023 / U:60.712 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site