On 01/17/2014 04:23 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:06:45PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
I suppose we could write something like:
struct task_struct *pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
{
const struct sched_class *class;
struct task_struct *p;
again:
if (likely(rq->nr_running)) {
if (likely(rq->nr_running == rq->cfs.h_nr_running))
return fair_sched_class.pick_next_task(rq, prev);
for_each_class(class) {
p = class->pick_next_task(rq, prev);
if (p)
return p;
}
}
if (idle_balance(rq))
goto again;
rq->idle_stamp = rq_clock(rq);
return idle_sched_class.pick_next_task(rq, prev);
}
Which keeps idle_balance() before put_prev_task(), and by using
idle_sched_clas.pick_next_task() doesn't rape the idle class interface
like you did :-)
But put_prev_task is called before pick_next_task, so idle_balance() is
called after now, no ?
No, put_prev_task() is called by the pick_next_task() that returns a
task. So in the idle case above, the idle_sched_class.pick_next_task()
will do the required put_prev_task().
Ah, ok. Let me try it.
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
