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    [W:0.022 / U:119.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site