Not until the next state is acted on - which happens after the state is fully determined. Is there a bug someplace, yes, but merely setting the flag does NOT actually change the state until the flag is acted upon.
jm7 [email protected] wrote on 04/30/2009 01:05:01 PM: > "Paul D. Buck" <[email protected]> > Sent by: [email protected] > > 04/30/2009 01:05 PM > > To > > [email protected] > > cc > > BOINC Developers Mailing List <[email protected]> > > Subject > > Re: [boinc_dev] 6.6.20 and work scheduling > > > On Apr 30, 2009, at 9:15 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > I have read the code in great detail. The first loop is an attempt to > > initialize a variable to a known state. The state is changed later as > > needed. > > And this is the point you keep missing. If the next state you change > to is Preempt, Then, you have preempted all tasks. > > You cannot start with all tasks preempted, change some of them back > and then assert that TSI is respected. > > If TSI is respected, you would only change the state of those tasks at > TSI to preempt. > > This is not what the code does. > > If TSI was respected I would not see tasks started and halted in > seconds. > > _______________________________________________ > boinc_dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev > To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and > (near bottom of page) enter your email address. > _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
