From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754543AbXLJIhj (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:37:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751407AbXLJIhc (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:37:32 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:54024 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751337AbXLJIhb (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:37:31 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:37:17 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Dmitry Adamushko Cc: Steven Rostedt , Gregory Haskins , LKML Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH git-sched 1/3] no need for 'affine wakeup' balancing in select_task_rq_fair() when task_cpu(p) == this_cpu Message-ID: <20071210083717.GC22699@elte.hu> References: <1197225382.6991.23.camel@earth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1197225382.6991.23.camel@earth> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Dmitry Adamushko wrote: > From: Dmitry Adamushko > > No need to do a check for 'affine wakeup and passive balancing > possibilities' in select_task_rq_fair() when task_cpu(p) == this_cpu. > > I guess, this part got missed upon introduction of per-sched_class > select_task_rq() in try_to_wake_up(). thanks, applied. Ingo