From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Ben Blum <bblum@google.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] sched/cpusets fixes, more changes are needed
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:15:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100325191554.GA19830@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1269538142.12097.87.camel@laptop>
On 03/25, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Yeah, such a smaller patch might work too, but I was trying to remove
> some more of the complexity we grown.
>
> Being able to fully remove that TASK_WAKING check from task_rq_lock()
> and only have it in set_cpus_allowed_ptr() would reduce some fast-path
> logic.
OK. Agreed.
> You patch add a memory barrier and an unlock_wait(), which, while
> seemingly correct, are harder to parse than the modified locking.
Yes, lock + set WAKING + unlock is simpler and cleaner, but this
doesn't matter.
I think your patch should address all problems.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-25 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-15 9:09 [PATCH 0/6] sched/cpusets fixes, more changes are needed Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-24 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-24 18:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-25 15:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 16:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 16:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-03-25 17:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-25 19:15 ` Oleg Nesterov [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=20100325191554.GA19830@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bblum@google.com \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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