linux-kernel - sched: Am I missing something?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2009 23:22:41 +1000
From:	Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: sched: Am I missing something?

Or is the line:

	p->prio = effective_prio(p);

in wake_up_new_task() an expensive no op.

As far as I can tell from reading the code, it will always be the case 
that EITHER rt_prio(p->prio) is true OR p->prio == p->normal_prio when 
this call is made and, in either case, the value of p->prio will be 
unchanged.  In addition, when this call is made p->normal_prio is 
already equal to to normal_prio(p), so the side effects of the function 
(setting p->normal_prio) are also unnecessary.

Am I correct or have I missed something?

Peter
-- 
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058@...pond.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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/