[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1191362271.29539.1.camel@perkele>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:57:51 -0400
From: Eric St-Laurent <ericstl34@...patico.ca>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: David Schwartz <davids@...master.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: yield API
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 08:46 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[...]
> APIs that are not in any real, meaningful use, despite a decade of
> presence are not really interesting to me personally. (especially in
> this case where we know exactly _why_ the API is used so rarely.) Sure
> we'll continue to support it in the best possible way, with the usual
> kernel maintainance policy: without hurting other, more commonly used
> APIs. That was the principle we followed in previous schedulers too. And
> if anyone has a patch to make sched_yield() better than it is today, i'm
> of course interested in it.
Do you still have intentions to add a directed yield API? I remember
seeing it in the earlier CFS patches.
- Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists