Re: RFC for a new Scheduling policy/class in the Linux-kernel

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 18:06 +0200, Raistlin wrote:
> Anyway, maybe if, on some architecture, for some kind of application,
> the affinity may have been set to preserve some kind actual cache or
> memory locality for the task access pattern, maybe this could be an
> issue, couldn't it? :-)
> I mean, in some case where being sure of having a task running on a
> particular CPU is somehow of paramount importance...

Right, and you answered your own question :-), its _running_ that is
important, so as long as its blocked (not running), you're free to place
the task on another cpu if that helps out with something.



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