Who can commit this.. kse vs ULE

Scott Long scottl at freebsd.org
Sun Mar 21 01:45:56 PST 2004


Thanks.  What is the problem that is referred to in the email?  This
patch looks to be a hack.

Scott

Julian Elischer wrote:
> Scott here's the patch I mentioned...
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:30:45 -0800
> From: David O'Brien <obrien at freebsd.org>
> To: Taku YAMAMOTO <taku at cent.saitama-u.ac.jp>
> Cc: freebsd-current at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] for SCHED_ULE & libpthread issue (was Re: I like
> 
> 	SCHED_4BSD)
> 
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:23:47AM +0900, Taku YAMAMOTO wrote:
> 
>>Until the problem is fully addressed, I will propose following patch
>>to be applied. (the least intrusive one attached in the former message)
> 
>  
> Do people think we should commit this?
> 
> --- sched_ule.c.orig	Fri Feb 13 05:24:48 2004
> +++ sched_ule.c	Fri Feb 13 05:37:53 2004
> @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@
> #define	SCHED_INTERACTIVE(kg)						\
>      (sched_interact_score(kg) < SCHED_INTERACT_THRESH)
> #define	SCHED_CURR(kg, ke)						\
> -    (ke->ke_thread->td_priority != kg->kg_user_pri ||			\
> +    (ke->ke_thread->td_priority < kg->kg_user_pri ||			\
>      SCHED_INTERACTIVE(kg))
>  
>  /*
> @@ -1166,11 +1166,8 @@
>  	 */
>  	if ((ke->ke_flags & KEF_ASSIGNED) == 0) {
>  		if (TD_IS_RUNNING(td)) {
> -			if (td->td_proc->p_flag & P_SA) {
> -				kseq_load_rem(KSEQ_CPU(ke->ke_cpu), ke);
> -				setrunqueue(td);
> -			} else 
> -				kseq_runq_add(KSEQ_SELF(), ke);
> +			kseq_load_rem(KSEQ_CPU(ke->ke_cpu), ke);
> +			setrunqueue(td);
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 
> 




More information about the freebsd-threads mailing list