On 2016/04/06 at 17:30, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 06:14:28PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote: >> Your proposal is very nice! >> >> At the sched_init() stage we only have one (to be "idle") task and with irq >> disabled, >> no scheduling will happen, and the cpu_possible_mask was already initiated, >> so it's >> safe to simply move them there. >> >> Also, how about rt&deadline sharing a percpu mask? Because only one of them >> can >> use the mask at a moment, operations are always under some >> spin_lock_irqsave(). >> >> I made a new patch below, slightly tested by running tens of rt&dl tasks for >> a while, >> are you fine with it? > Yep, looks fine. Please submit as a proper patch.
Will do, thanks! Regards, Xunlei > > Thanks!
