From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@caldera.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
torvalds@transmeta.com, arjanv@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] preempt abstraction
Date: 08 Jan 2002 16:30:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1010525436.3383.118.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C3B5C02.9929B8@zip.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <10940.1010511619@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> <1010516250.3229.21.camel@phantasy>, <1010516250.3229.21.camel@phantasy>; from rml@tech9.net on Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 01:57:28PM -0500 <20020108195920.A14642@caldera.de> <3C3B5C02.9929B8@zip.com.au>
On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 15:52, Andrew Morton wrote:
> naah. preempt() means preempt. But the implementation
> is in fact maybe_preempt(), or preempt_if_needed().
Agreed. preempt has me envision various things, none of which are what
we want. What is the difference between schedule vs preempt?
Confusing.
What we are calling preempt here is the same as schedule, but we check
if it is needed. So I suggest conditional_schedule, which has the
benefit of being widely used in at least three patches.
schedule_if_needed, sched_if_needed, etc. both fit. Why introduce the
namespace preempt when we already have sched?
sched_conditional() and sched_needed() ?
Robert Love
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-08 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-08 17:40 [PATCH] preempt abstraction David Howells
2002-01-08 18:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-01-08 18:57 ` Robert Love
2002-01-08 18:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-01-08 20:52 ` Andrew Morton
2002-01-08 21:25 ` Roger Larsson
2002-01-08 22:12 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-01-08 22:35 ` David Howells
2002-01-08 22:46 ` David Howells
2002-01-08 23:05 ` Robert Love
2002-01-08 21:30 ` Robert Love [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=1010525436.3383.118.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@caldera.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox