From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:23:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:23:33 -0500 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:3601 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:23:33 -0500 Subject: Re: fairsched + O(1) process scheduler From: Robert Love To: Antonio Vargas Cc: William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20030402213629.GB13168@wind.cocodriloo.com> References: <20030401125159.GA8005@wind.cocodriloo.com> <20030401164126.GA993@holomorphy.com> <20030401221927.GA8904@wind.cocodriloo.com> <20030402124643.GA13168@wind.cocodriloo.com> <20030402163512.GC993@holomorphy.com> <20030402213629.GB13168@wind.cocodriloo.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1049319300.2872.21.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.3 (1.2.3-1) Date: 02 Apr 2003 16:35:00 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 16:36, Antonio Vargas wrote: > I've been thinking about this thing a while ago, and I think I could do this: > > a. Have a kernel thread which wakes up on each tick. Why not use the timer tick itself? It already calls scheduler_tick()... Oh, because you need to grab uidhash_lock? Ew. Needing a kernel thread for this is not pretty. > Also, this locking rule means I can't even read current->user->time_slice? > What if I changed the type to an atomic_int? You can always read a single word-sized type atomically. No need for atomic_t's. Robert Love