Re: [PATCH 1/5] 2.6.0 fix preempt ctx switch accounting

[Nick Piggin]

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>  
>
> > i'd prefer the much simpler patch below. This also keeps the kernel
> > preemption logic isolated instead of mixing it into the normal path.
> >    
>
> That patch still gets several cases wrong: we don't update any counters at
> all for the case where we were TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and we got made
> TASK_RUNNING because of having a signal pending.
>
> Also, we shouldn't update the context switch counter just because we 
> entered the scheduler. If we don't actually end up switching to anything 
> else, it shouldn't count as a context switch.
>
> So how about something like this?
>
> Totally untested. Comments?
>  

Thats about as good as you'll get it, I think.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/