Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: fix cgroup movement of newly created process
From: Daisuke Nishimura
Date: Tue Dec 13 2011 - 20:17:36 EST
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:41:09 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 15:57 +0900, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
>
> > kernel/sched_fair.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> you blink you loose, that file doesn't exist anymore.
>
hmm, indeed.
I'll rebase these patches onto the tip.
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > index 5c9e679..df145a9 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > @@ -4922,10 +4922,10 @@ static void task_move_group_fair(struct task_struct *p, int on_rq)
> > * to another cgroup's rq. This does somewhat interfere with the
> > * fair sleeper stuff for the first placement, but who cares.
> > */
> > - if (!on_rq)
> > + if (!on_rq && p->state != TASK_RUNNING)
> > p->se.vruntime -= cfs_rq_of(&p->se)->min_vruntime;
> > set_task_rq(p, task_cpu(p));
> > - if (!on_rq)
> > + if (!on_rq && p->state != TASK_RUNNING)
> > p->se.vruntime += cfs_rq_of(&p->se)->min_vruntime;
> > }
> > #endif
>
> The much saner way of writing that is something like:
>
> /*
> * Comment explaining stuff..
> */
> if (!on_rq && p->state == TASK_RUNNING)
> on_rq = 1;
>
> ...
>
will do in the next post.
Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
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/