From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965037AbWFTBQT (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:16:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965035AbWFTBQT (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:16:19 -0400 Received: from omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.93.154]:10565 "EHLO omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965037AbWFTBQT (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:16:19 -0400 Message-ID: <44974C60.9050508@bigpond.net.au> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:16:16 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Why is activate_task() used in __migrate_task()? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at omta02sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.133.38] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:16:17 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org It would seem to me that using activate_task() in __migrate_task() in lieu of __activate_task() has two undesirable consequences: 1) recalculating and resetting prio and 2) resetting the time stamp. The fact that the time stamp is adjusted for the change of run queue just before activate_task() is called reinforces my suspicion that these consequences are unintended. Is there a reason for using activate_task() that I can't see? Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce