[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140520163651.GY2485@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:36:51 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: don't try to balance rt_runtime when it is
futile
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 06:24:36PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Of course one can argue that we can find out that the task is resuming in userspace from
> CPU 0 scheduler entry without the need for previous context tracking, but I couldn't find safe
> solution for that. This is because probing on user/kernel boundaries can only be done
> in the soft way, throught explicit function calls. So there is an inevitable shift
> between soft and hard boundaries, between what we probe and what we can guess.
you can hook into set_task_cpu(), not sure its going to be pretty, but
that is _the_ place to hook migration related nonsense.
--
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