RE: [patch] scheduler bugfix, SMP, 2.4.0-test7

From: Linus Torvalds (
Date: Mon Aug 28 2000 - 18:39:12 EST

On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Dimitris Michailidis wrote:
> On 28-Aug-2000 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I think the right solution is to completely split up "schedule()" into two
> > different functions (which just share 99% of the code), and basically have
> > the idle thread call the _other_ schedule. The one that never does the
> > test at all.
> Just to clarify, you're suggesting having a schedule_and_btw_current_is_idle
> and calling this from cpu_idle(), right?


> In this case the two schedules
> would share quite a bit less than 99% of the code. Idle tasks don't have to
> deal with kernel lock, ->state, SCHED_YIELD and RT exhaustion, to name a few.

Good point. Although it might be hard to sanely still share the actual
code (I'd hate to get a bigger icache footprint, so I'd like the common
code to be _truly_ common, not just on a source level).

But it looks like the thing would work.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:22 EST