![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
[re-added Russell to the CC list] Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > >>>The patch below should address this problem for all architectures, by >>>doing an explicit schedule() in the init code before calling into >>>cpu_idle(). >> >>Yuck - wouldn't it be better just to fix all the architectures instead >>of applying band aid? > > > it's not really a bug in any architecture - it's a scheduler setup > detail that i changed, and which i initially thought would be best > handled in cpu_idle(), but which is easier to do in rest_init(). > Hmm, what has changed is that secondary CPUs haven't got need_resched set in their idle routines. Whether or not it is possible to a task on their runqueue at that stage, I didn't bother looking - I assume you did. However, Ingo - instead of calling schedule() at the end of rest_init(), why not just set need_resched instead? -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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: 2005-05-29 06:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||