lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Implementing temporal affinity
On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, Chris Swiedler wrote:

> Looking at the code, however, I don't see how we can tell how long a process
> has been on a CPU. We could add a field to task_struct which indicates this.
> Also this would require that we remove the #ifdef __SMP__ for the processor
> and last_processor fields in the task_queue. So we'd be increasing the size
> of the task_struct by 3 ints for UP, which by itself may make the idea not
> worthwhile...
>
> Any opinions?
Is it just me, or is both last_processor and processor always going to
equal 0 on UP, and no matter how long you delay setting of last_processor
to processor, you always going to be setting a zeroed variable to a zeroed
variable? What would you gain by un-#ifdefing last_process and processor
on UP?



-
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 12:38    [W:0.040 / U:33.516 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site