From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Emmanuel Ackaouy <ackaouy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: credit scheduler and HYPERVISOR_yield()
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:06:14 +0200
Message-ID: <7e903d73fbea1bb8ca97396fef058b2b@gmail.com>
References: <20071008234118.GA1396@totally.trollied.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v624)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <20071008234118.GA1396@totally.trollied.org.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: John Levon <levon@movementarian.org>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi John.

The expected behavior of yield() (or any schedule operation really) is
that the current VCPU will be placed on the runq behind all VCPUs of
equal or greater priority.

Looking at __runq_insert() in sched_credit.c, it looks correct to me in
that respect.

Can you clarify what's going wrong?

On Oct 9, 2007, at 1:41, John Levon wrote:

>
> It looks like a HYPERVISOR_yield() call will end placing the yielded
> VCPU at the head of run queue if there are only equal-or-lower priority
> VCPUs on the queue. Shouldn't it place it after any equal-priority CPUs
> on the list?
>
> thanks
> john
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>