[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B5446A1.7070306@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:31:45 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, awalls@...ix.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com, avi@...hat.com,
johannes@...solutions.net, andi@...stfloor.org,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/40] sched: add wakeup/sleep sched_notifiers and allow
NULL notifier ops
On 01/18/2010 06:57 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 09:57 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> @@ -2439,6 +2440,8 @@ static inline void ttwu_post_activation(struct task_struct *p, struct rq *rq,
>> rq->idle_stamp = 0;
>> }
>> #endif
>> + if (success)
>> + fire_sched_notifiers(p, wakeup);
>> }
>>
>> /**
>
> So why can't you call fire_sched_notifier(p, wakeup) right next to
> activate_task(rq, p, 1) in ttwu_activate() ?
I was worried about calling notifier callback before notifying the
sched_class of the wakeup. Conceptually, the notifier callback should
be called after all sched internal stuff about the wakeup finish,
so...
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