From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: nigel@nrg.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 20:19:54 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <22991.985166394@ocs3.ocs-net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.05.10103201920410.26853-100000@cosmic.nrg.org>
Nigel Gamble wrote:
> A task that has been preempted is on the run queue and can be
> rescheduled on a different CPU, so I can't see how a per-CPU counter
> would work. It seems to me that you would need a per run queue
> counter, like the example I gave in a previous posting.
Ouch. What about all the per cpu structures in the kernel, how do you
handle them if a preempted task can be rescheduled on another cpu?
int count[NR_CPUS], *p;
p = count+smp_processor_id(); /* start on cpu 0, &count[0] */
if (*p >= 1024) {
/* preempt here, reschedule on cpu 1 */
*p = 1; /* update cpu 0 count from cpu 1, oops */
}
Unless you find every use of a per cpu structure and wrap a spin lock
around it, migrating a task from one cpu to another is going to be a
source of wierd and wonderful errors. Since the main use of per cpu
structures is to avoid locks, adding a spin lock to every structure
will be a killer. Or have I missed something?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-21 9:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-15 1:25 [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Nigel Gamble
2001-03-17 17:34 ` Pavel Machek
2001-03-19 21:01 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 8:43 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 9:32 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 0:48 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 1:23 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 3:35 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 8:04 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 9:04 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 14:32 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-23 20:42 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-28 11:47 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-21 9:19 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2001-03-21 9:41 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 10:05 ` Andrew Morton
2001-03-22 0:20 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 10:57 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 11:30 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 17:07 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 18:18 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 22:25 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-21 15:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-03-28 10:20 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-28 20:51 ` george anzinger
2001-03-29 9:43 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-30 6:32 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 0:24 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 0:26 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 20:11 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 7:48 ` george anzinger
2001-04-01 21:13 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-02 19:56 ` george anzinger
2001-04-04 17:59 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 21:07 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-04 17:51 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 18:25 ` Roger Larsson
2001-03-20 22:06 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 22:27 ` george anzinger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-06 23:52 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 0:45 ` Andi Kleen
2001-04-07 1:25 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 19:59 ` Rusty Russell
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=22991.985166394@ocs3.ocs-net \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nigel@nrg.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