[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1432983263.11346.15.camel@twins>
Date: Sat, 30 May 2015 12:54:23 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: pang.xunlei@....com.cn
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Xunlei Pang <xlpang@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] sched/rt: Check to push the task away after its
affinity was changed
On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 10:20 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Makes me like the thing even less though..
Steven, why do we normally push on schedule()? Would not the natural
location be where we add to pushable_tasks?
Which would be here in set_cpus_allowed() and wakeups. schedule() seems
like a second best location.
--
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