Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 17 Sep 2002 20:57:31 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] BUG(): sched.c: Line 944 |
| |
On 17 Sep 2002, Robert Love wrote:
> OK so do we want to do (a): > > (moved down to after the preempt_disable() and release_kernel_lock()) > > if (likely(current->state != TASK_ZOMBIE) > if (unlikely((preempt_count() & ~PREEMPT_ACTIVE) != 1)) > ... > > or go with (b) where we split schedule() into schedule(), > exit_schedule(), and do_schedule().
i'd do (a). current->state is to be used anyway, and the default-untaken first branch should be cheap. Plus by moving things down the splitup of the function would create more code duplication than necessery i think.
Ingo
- 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/
|  |