[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1258913689.9457.15.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:14:49 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: add the other missing clock update to
migrate_task()
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 17:58 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 14:16 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > We should make double_rq_lock() and double_lock_balance() behave
> > equivalent wrt update_rq_clock().
> >
> > Current, depending on CONFIG_PREEMPT, double_lock_balance() already
> > updates both rq clocks.
>
> Hm, right. Better plan.
Oops, nope. Consistency is still a good plan, however, that update is
still needed, because it's the case where we're _not_ going to use the
migration thread.
-Mike
--
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