Re: 2.0.x SMP performances compared to 2.1.x

David Wragg (dpw@doc.ic.ac.uk)
30 Aug 1998 17:00:30 +0000

torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote on linux-kernel:
> Doing a pause() will force a re-schedule, but there is no guarantee that
> it will actually schedule anything else: the kernel may well decide that
> the pausing process is still a good process to use.

Despite pondering this for a while, it still makes no sense to me.

sys_pause() sets the process state to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, and then
calls schedule(). Usually this will get it taken off the run-queue. So
how could it then get selected to run?

--
Dave Wragg


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html