Messages in this thread | | | From | David Schwartz <> | Date | Thu, 20 Jun 2002 13:31:47 -0700 | Subject | Re: Question about sched_yield() |
| |
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:45:55 -0400, Stevie O wrote:
>At 11:00 AM 6/18/2002 -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
>>This is the same error repeated again. Since you realize that an endless >>loop on sched_yield is *not* equivalent to blocking, why do you then say >>"in >>fact doing useful work"? By what form of ESP is the kernel supposed to >>determine that the sched_yield task is not 'doing useful work' and the >>other >>task is?
>By this form of ESP: sched_yield() means "I have nothing better to do right >now, give my time to someone who does". If a thread is doing useful work, >why would it call sched_yield() ?!?
To give other threads a chance to do useful work too, perhaps because it just released a mutex that other threads might need that it held for an unusually long time.
DS
- 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/
| |