On Sat, 12 Jun 1999 17:46:02 +0200 (CEST), Andrea Arcangeli
<andrea@suse.de> said:
> I changed reschedule idle this way:
...
> The old reschedule_idle according to me this is really wrong (see my
> old email nobody replied me yet):
> - if ((p->processor == cpu) && related(cpu_curr(cpu), p))
> - return;
> The current way to use the related in reschedule_idle_slow seems just a
> random way to use related(). There's no point in _not_ rescheduling a new
> task that needs the big kernel lock over a "related" task if such task is
> the _only_ task that needs the big kernel lock in the system.
Umm, check the stock definition of related(): if the two tasks are
related then we know for sure that they both want the kernel lock. We
cannot possibly find a related task if there is only one task waiting
for the global lock.
--Stephen
-
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/