[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090710152425.GB5318@nowhere>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:24:27 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Drop the need_resched() loop from
cond_resched()
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:17:38PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 10 July 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/sched.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> > @@ -6613,11 +6613,9 @@ static void __cond_resched(void)
> > * PREEMPT_ACTIVE, which could trigger a second
> > * cond_resched() call.
> > */
> > - do {
> > - add_preempt_count(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > - schedule();
> > - sub_preempt_count(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > - } while (need_resched());
> > + add_preempt_count(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > + schedule();
> > + sub_preempt_count(PREEMPT_ACTIVE);
> > }
> >
>
> If you drop the loop, then you should also remove the comment that
> explains why it was put there.
>
> Arnd <><
Hmm, these comments seem to actually explain why we do the PREEMPT_ACTIVE
trick, which is to prevent from cond_resched() recursion, right?
--
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