Re: Process Scope Scheduling Support

Peter Benie (pjb1008@cam.ac.uk)
Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:42:04 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Stefan Laudat: "Re: TEST to see if our largest list has some problem..."
Previous message: Grigory Lyahovitsky: "PROBLEM: Avoiding filesystem caching..."

cd_smith@ou.edu writes ("Re: Process Scope Scheduling Support"):
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Riley Williams wrote:
> > > I'm still trying to figure out why adding a member to the
> > > task_struct keeps the kernel from booting even when I don't
> > > even use that member anywhere in the source.
> >
> > At a guess, the task structure has some alignment requirement that
> > your additional member breaks...
>
> Oh, I didn't know that... what are the alignment requirements? At the
> very least, I can document them in include/linux/sched.h and submit a
> patch for that.

I've never had a problem adding extra items to task_struct so I doubt
that alignment is the issue. A possible source of problems is failing to
correctly update INIT_TASK for the new task_struct, but that's usually
detected at compile-time.

Peter

-
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.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Stefan Laudat: "Re: TEST to see if our largest list has some problem..."
Previous message: Grigory Lyahovitsky: "PROBLEM: Avoiding filesystem caching..."