From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Ben Blum <bblum@google.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] sched/cpusets fixes, more changes are needed
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:15:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100325191554.GA19830@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1269538142.12097.87.camel@laptop>
On 03/25, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Yeah, such a smaller patch might work too, but I was trying to remove
> some more of the complexity we grown.
>
> Being able to fully remove that TASK_WAKING check from task_rq_lock()
> and only have it in set_cpus_allowed_ptr() would reduce some fast-path
> logic.
OK. Agreed.
> You patch add a memory barrier and an unlock_wait(), which, while
> seemingly correct, are harder to parse than the modified locking.
Yes, lock + set WAKING + unlock is simpler and cleaner, but this
doesn't matter.
I think your patch should address all problems.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-25 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-15 9:09 [PATCH 0/6] sched/cpusets fixes, more changes are needed Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-24 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-24 18:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-25 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 16:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 16:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 17:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-25 19:15 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100325191554.GA19830@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bblum@google.com \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.