Re: question about blk_schedule_flush_plug

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon May 23 2011 - 03:37:44 EST

On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 17:05 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> I was looking at the scheduler changes going into 2.6.39 again and wondered
> about the use of blk_schedule_flush_plug smack in the middle of schedule()
> It looks like this:
> if (blk_needs_flush_plug(prev)) {
> raw_spin_unlock(&rq->lock);
> blk_schedule_flush_plug(prev);
> raw_spin_lock(&rq->lock);
> }
> Now call me suspicious but to my eyes it looks really dubious unlocking the
> runqueue like that right in the heart of schedule().
> Comments?

Yeah, that's quite all-right, both pre_schedule() and idle_balance()
already did that too.

We can safely release the runqueue lock after deactivate_task() and
before put_prev_task().
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at