[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D234E60.3010804@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:44:16 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>
CC: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Avi Kiviti <avi@...hat.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -v3 PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function
On 01/04/2011 11:41 AM, Hillf Danton wrote:
> /* !curr->sched_class->yield_to_task || */
>
>> + curr->sched_class != p->sched_class) {
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
> /*
> * ask scheduler to compute the next for successfully kicking
> @p onto its CPU
> * what if p_rq is rt_class to do?
> */
> next = pick_next_task(p_rq);
> if (next != p)
> p->se.vruntime = next->se.vruntime -1;
> deactivate_task(p_rq, p, 0);
> activate_task(p_rq, p, 0);
> if (rq == p_rq)
> schedule();
> else
> resched_task(p_rq->curr);
> yield = 0;
Wouldn't that break for FIFO and RR tasks?
There's a reason all the scheduler folks wanted a
per-class yield_to_task function :)
--
All rights reversed
--
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