On 20 Feb 2002, Robert Love wrote:
>
> With a preemptive kernel, explicit conditional schedules when
> preempt_count is zero are a waste of cycles and code size.
Hmm.. Are there any other kind?
Another way of saying this: how can a conditional schedule _ever_ be
nothing but a waste of cycles and code size with preemption enabled?
If the reason is the BKL, then I would much prefer those paths to be
BKL-fixed, than have two different conditional schedules.
In short, I'd rather get a patch that just unconditionally makes the
conditional schedules no-ops with preemption enabled. That would seem to
make a lot more sense.
Linus
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 23 2002 - 21:00:36 EST