[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1307622863.9218.40.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:34:23 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: remove resetting exec_start in
put_prev_task_rt()
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 16:04 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com> wrote:
> > Resetting exec_start, after updated in update_curr_rt(), could open window for
> > messing up the subsequent computations of delta_exec of the given task.
>
> I can't see how could this happen. what kind of 'subsequent computations'
> do you mean?
I still don't see a race.
Hilf, if you still believe there's a race here, can you explain it in
detail. Do something like:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
do_something;
does_something_not_expected;
continue_something;
Obviously changing what those "somethings" are. That way we can visually
see what you are trying to say.
>
> But because exec_start will be reset by _pick_next_task_rt()/set_curr_task_rt(),
> you patch is ok. IMHO it is not critical, it's just cleanup instead.
I disagree. Yes the exec_start is reset there, but I like the fact that
it's 0 when not running.
-- Steve
--
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