From: Joe Korty <joe.korty@ccur.com>
To: Robert Love <rml@mvista.com>
Cc: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
"Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>,
"'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@digeo.com>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'mingo@elte.hu'" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Li, Adam" <adam.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:28:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030619172839.GA1087@rudolph.ccur.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1056043409.8770.25.camel@localhost>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 10:23:30AM -0700, Robert Love wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 10:19, 'joe.korty@ccur.com' wrote:
>
> > I posted a fix for this a month ago that was ignored. Which is a
> > good thing, since now that I look at it again, I don't care for the
> > approach I took nor does it appear to be complete.
>
> Ah, sorry for missing it. Other than that tertiary statement inside an
> if ;) my patch is about the same.
>
> Why do you think it is incomplete? It looks correct to me.
It may be better to add it to __activate_task() rather than after the
single activate_task() use. At the time I wrote the patch I did not
think to look at the five __activate_task() calls to see if they each
needed the test. By me not looking, my patch is automatically
incorrect, even if it turns out to be correct.
Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-19 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-19 6:06 O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 6:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-06-19 16:00 ` george anzinger
2003-06-19 17:19 ` 'joe.korty@ccur.com'
2003-06-19 17:23 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 17:28 ` Joe Korty [this message]
2003-06-19 17:45 ` [patch] setscheduler fix Robert Love
2003-06-19 18:20 ` Joe Korty
2003-06-19 18:38 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 19:09 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-06-20 2:53 O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 19:22 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 18:31 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 18:36 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 6:52 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 17:43 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 4:38 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 2:55 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 1:44 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 1:58 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 2:02 ` george anzinger
2003-06-19 4:34 ` 'joe.korty@ccur.com'
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=20030619172839.GA1087@rudolph.ccur.com \
--to=joe.korty@ccur.com \
--cc=adam.li@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rml@mvista.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