[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B1C75F3.9080808@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:26:43 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, avi@...hat.com, efault@....de,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] sched: implement try_to_wake_up_local()
Hello,
On 12/04/2009 07:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 12:56 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
>> @@ -2410,6 +2410,10 @@ static inline void ttwu_woken_up(struct task_struct *p, struct rq *rq,
>> rq->idle_stamp = 0;
>> }
>> #endif
>> + /*
>> + * Wake up is complete, fire wake up notifier. This allows
>> + * try_to_wake_up_local() to be called from wake up notifiers.
>> + */
>> if (success)
>> fire_sched_notifiers(p, wakeup);
>> }
>
>> @@ -5437,6 +5488,11 @@ need_resched_nonpreemptible:
>> if (unlikely(signal_pending_state(prev->state, prev))) {
>> prev->state = TASK_RUNNING;
>> } else {
>> + /*
>> + * Fire sleep notifier before changing any scheduler
>> + * state. This allows try_to_wake_up_local() to be
>> + * called from sleep notifiers.
>> + */
>> fire_sched_notifiers(prev, sleep);
>> deactivate_task(rq, prev, 1);
>> }
>
> These two hunks seem to belong to patch 6
Hmmm... it was intentional as, before this patch, there's no
try_to_wake_up_local() so it was strange to mention it in the comment.
I can move the comments but I don't think it's particularly better
that way.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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