Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 04 Jun 2006 14:32:24 +1000 | From | Peter Williams <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 1/4] sched: Add CPU rate soft caps |
| |
Con Kolivas wrote: > On Sunday 04 June 2006 11:08, Peter Williams wrote: >> 3. Thanks to suggestions from Con Kolivas with respect to alternative >> methods to reduce the possibility of a task being starved of CPU while >> holding an important system resource, enforcement of caps is now >> quite strict. However, there will still be occasions where caps may be >> exceeded due to this mechanism vetoing enforcement. > > Transcription bug here: > >> int fastcall __sched mutex_lock_interruptible(struct mutex *lock) >> { >> + int ret; >> + >> might_sleep(); >> return __mutex_fastpath_lock_retval >> (&lock->count, __mutex_lock_interruptible_slowpath); > > should be ret =
How embarrassing. I wonder why I didn't notice an "unreachable code" warning here?
Thanks Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce - 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/
| |