Re: New schedule() and semaphore implementation ...

Andrea Arcangeli (andrea@suse.de)
Sun, 13 Jun 1999 02:38:03 +0200 (CEST)


On Sat, 12 Jun 1999, Davide Libenzi wrote:

>But sure that if my goodness loop in __sem_wake_up() don't release the best
>task neither LIFO & FIFO will do.

With the difference that FIFO will work in O(1) while your sem_wake_up()
will work in O(nr_task_in_waitqueue). Your way the cost for every wakeup
would be `goodness_cost * nr_tasks_in_waitqueue'.

>Anyway is better a FIFO politics then give all tasks the free way.

Agreed.

Andrea Arcangeli

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