[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Dimitris Michailidis wrote:
> On 28-Aug-2000 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I think the right solution is to completely split up "schedule()" into two
> > different functions (which just share 99% of the code), and basically have
> > the idle thread call the _other_ schedule. The one that never does the
> > test at all.
> Just to clarify, you're suggesting having a schedule_and_btw_current_is_idle
> and calling this from cpu_idle(), right?


> In this case the two schedules
> would share quite a bit less than 99% of the code. Idle tasks don't have to
> deal with kernel lock, ->state, SCHED_YIELD and RT exhaustion, to name a few.

Good point. Although it might be hard to sanely still share the actual
code (I'd hate to get a bigger icache footprint, so I'd like the common
code to be _truly_ common, not just on a source level).

But it looks like the thing would work.


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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.077 / U:1.672 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site