Re: [PATCH 1/5] 2.6.0 fix preempt ctx switch accounting

Nick Piggin
2003-12-20T23:15:48Z

Linus Torvalds wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>
>>i'd prefer the much simpler patch below. This also keeps the kernel
>>preemption logic isolated instead of mixing it into the normal path.
>>
>>
>
>That patch still gets several cases wrong: we don't update any counters at
>all for the case where we were TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and we got made
>TASK_RUNNING because of having a signal pending.
>
>Also, we shouldn't update the context switch counter just because we
>entered the scheduler. If we don't actually end up switching to anything
>else, it shouldn't count as a context switch.
>
>So how about something like this?
>
>Totally untested. Comments?
>
>

Thats about as good as you'll get it, I think.