From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luck, Tony" Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:51:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] SN2 user-MMIO CPU migration Message-Id: <20060124215112.GA17819@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com> List-Id: References: <20060118163305.Y42462@chenjesu.americas.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060118163305.Y42462@chenjesu.americas.sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 03:12:48PM -0600, Brent Casavant wrote: > > But I'd also like to see how invasive a "task has migrated" bit in > > thread_info.flags (as suggested elsewhere in this thread) gets to > > be. > > I'll be happy to do this if you really want. That said, having stared > at this code enough now, I don't believe it would be a better solution. You are probably right. > So, does this look better? > + .last_cpu = 0, \ How does .last_cpu get propagated to new processes, and what is it initialized to? Right now it looks like there is an odd quirk that we'll call platform_switch_from() as each process starts running for the first time [or is the whole thread_info structure copied from the parent someplace that I didn't notice]. -Tony