From: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: <mgix@mgix.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about sched_yield()
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:12:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020618191233.AAA27954@shell.webmaster.com@whenever> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020619045606.3566a8cc.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 04:56:06 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:46:29 -0700
>David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
>>"The sched_yield() function shall force the running thread to relinquish
>>the
>>processor until it again becomes the head of its thread list. It takes no
>>arguments."
>Notice how incredibly useless this definition is. It's even defined in
>terms
>of UP.
Huh?! This definition is beautiful in that it makes no such assumptions. How
would you say this is invalid on an SMP machine? By "the processor", they
mean "the process on which the thread is running" (the only one it could
relinquish, after all).
DS
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-18 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-15 22:15 Question about sched_yield() mgix
2002-06-16 14:43 ` [patch] " Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 0:46 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 0:55 ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 1:51 ` mgix
2002-06-18 3:18 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 9:36 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 16:58 ` Chris Friesen
2002-06-18 17:12 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-18 17:19 ` mgix
2002-06-18 18:01 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 18:05 ` mgix
2002-06-18 19:11 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 16:58 ` Rob Landley
2002-06-18 19:25 ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 19:53 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:12 ` mgix
2002-06-18 20:42 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:47 ` mgix
2002-06-18 22:00 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 20:08 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-19 11:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 12:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 22:43 ` Olivier Galibert
2002-06-18 18:21 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-06-18 17:13 ` Robert Love
2002-06-18 18:00 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:45 ` Stevie O
2002-06-19 2:11 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-19 2:52 ` Stevie O
2002-06-20 20:31 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 17:23 ` Rik van Riel
2002-06-18 17:50 ` Chris Friesen
2002-06-18 1:41 ` mgix
2002-06-18 3:21 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 3:52 ` mgix
2002-06-18 4:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 11:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 11:47 ` scheduler timeslice distribution, threads, processes. [was: Re: Question about sched_yield()] Ingo Molnar
2002-06-18 18:56 ` Question about sched_yield() Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 19:12 ` David Schwartz [this message]
2002-06-18 20:19 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-18 20:40 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 20:42 ` mgix
2002-06-18 22:03 ` David Schwartz
2002-06-18 22:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 11:29 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 14:03 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-19 22:25 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-19 22:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-06-19 2:10 ` jw schultz
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=20020618191233.AAA27954@shell.webmaster.com@whenever \
--to=davids@webmaster.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgix@mgix.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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