[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D0CEA7F.9080603@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 19:08:15 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
CC: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -v2 PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function
On 12/17/2010 09:15 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> BTW, with this vruntime donation thingy, what prevents a task from
> forking off accomplices who do nothing but wait for a wakeup and
> yield_to(exploit)?
>
What's the difference between that and forking off accomplices who
run(exploit) directly?
Many threads dominating the scheduler has been solved by group
scheduling. We need to make sure directed yield doesn't violate that,
but I don't see new problems.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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