From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:22:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:22:16 -0400 Received: from f14a-pat.swiftview.com ([208.151.247.147]:19146 "EHLO swiftview.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:22:06 -0400 Message-ID: <3B3A3FA3.B482B78B@swiftview.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:18:43 -0700 From: Scott Long Reply-To: scott@swiftview.com Organization: SwiftView, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: wake_up vs. wake_up_sync Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I'm having trouble understanding the difference between these. Synchronous apparently causes try_to_wake_up() to NOT call reschedule_idle() but I'm uncertain what reschedule_idle() is doing. I assume it just looks for an idle CPU and makes that CPU reschedule. What is the purpose of wake_up_sync? Why would you want to prevent reschedule_idle()? Scott