[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
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:

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.029 / U:1.896 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site