On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 13:14:53 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> OK, so should not the whole HAVE_RT_PUSH_IPI thing have avoided that > loop entirely? And therefore made the point moot? I believe there was another issue that we had in our tests. But I don't have the trace available with me. I'll rerun the tests when I get back home and have some more concrete examples for you. > > In any case, can't we add another cpupri for pushable tasks and use that > to find the highest priority task to pull and avoid the loop thus? I thought about this too, but I was a bit concerned about complexities this would add. But I can look into it. Currently I'm in NYC for personal reasons and will take a look at this when I get back. -- Steve
