Re: Scheduler Cleanup

From: Mike Kravetz (kravetz@us.ibm.com)
Date: Wed Dec 05 2001 - 18:46:18 EST

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Loadable drivers [was SMP/cc Cluster description ]"
Previous message: Stuart Young: "Re: NVIDIA kernel module"
In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Reply: Ingo Molnar: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 03:44:42PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> Anyway me too have verified an increased latency with sched_yield() test
> and next days I'm going to try the real one with the cycle counter
> sampler.
> I've a suspect, but i've to see the disassembly of schedule() before
> talking :)

One thing to note is that possible acquisition of the runqueue
lock was reintroduced in sys_sched_yield(). From looking at
the code, it seems the purpose was to ?add fairness? in the case
of multiple yielders. Is that correct Ingo?

-- 
Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Loadable drivers [was SMP/cc Cluster description ]"
Previous message: Stuart Young: "Re: NVIDIA kernel module"
In reply to: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Next in thread: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Reply: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Reply: Ingo Molnar: "Re: Scheduler Cleanup"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 21:00:31 EST