[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1356044865.5896.78.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:07:45 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Move cpu rq properties from "struct rt_rq" to
"struct rq"
On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 02:16 +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> 20.12.2012, 21:53, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>:
> > On Tue, 18 Dec 2012, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> >
> >> The members rt_nr_total, rt_nr_migratory, overloaded and pushable_tasks are
> >> properties of cpu runqueue, not group rt_rq.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because, they depend on number and properties of all processes of rq, not of nested rt_rq.
>
You're answer is still confusing.
struct rq {
[...]
struct rt_rq rt;
rt_rq is just a part of rq. What's the point?
rq = container_of(rt_rq, struct rt_rq, rt);
As the comment above struct rt_rq says:
/* Real-Time classes' related field in a runqueue: */
Those look like fields related to the Real-Time class. I don't see them
used outside of kernel/sched/rt.c
-- Steve
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > tglx
--
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