lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: SCHED_BATCH and SCHED_BATCH numbering
Albert Cahalan wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-08-04 at 23:06, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>Peter Williams wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Nick Piggin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>However if you add or remove scheduling policies, your
>>>>p->policy method breaks.
>>>
>>>
>>>Not if Albert's numbering system is used.
>>>
>>
>>What if another realtime policy is added? Or one is removed?
>
>
> What if, what if...
>
> You're going to have to change the code anyway.
> One might toss this into <linux/sched.h> to make
> as a nice reminder:
>
> #define SCHEDS_RT (SCHED_RR|SCHED_FIFO)
>

I'm not saying your renumbering is a bad idea, but making the
argument that it would simplify rt_task is bogus.

> As it is now, SCHED_FIFO is already used as a
> bit flag in one place.
>

But it isn't a bit flag, we're just lucky it works. Submit a
patch?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans