[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110728055043.GA570@windriver.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:50:43 +0800
From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Carsten Emde <ce@...g.ch>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...e.crashing.org>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
Subject: Re: On migrate_disable() and latencies
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:30:08AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> o Tasks awakening outside of migrate-disable regions will pick
> the CPU running the lowest-priority task, whether or not this
> task is in migrate-disable state. (At least I don't see
> anything in 3.0-rt3 that looks like a scheduling decision
> based on ->migrate_disable, perhaps due to blindness.)
I'm also confused here, seems we just disable migration for RT task.
migrate_disable()
{
...
if (p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed)
p->sched_class->set_cpus_allowed(p, mask);
p->rt.nr_cpus_allowed = cpumask_weight(mask);
...
}
Shouldn't we also forbid migration on !RT task?
Thanks,
Yong
--
Only stand for myself
--
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