Re: [RFC] sched: make callers check lock contention forcond_resched_lock()

[Ingo Molnar]

* Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Replaced Ingo's address with kernel.org one,
> 
> On Thu, 03 May 2012 17:47:30 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 22:00 +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > > But as I could not see why spin_needbreak() was differently
> > > implemented
> > > depending on CONFIG_PREEMPT, I wanted to understand the meaning. 
> > 
> > Its been that way since before voluntary preemption was introduced, so
> > its possible Ingo simply missed that spot and nobody noticed until now.
> > 
> > Ingo, do you have any recollections from back when?
> 
> ping

I'm not sure we had a usable spin_is_contended() back then, nor 
was the !PREEMPT case in my mind really.

( The patch looks ugly though, in 99% of the lines it just does
  something that cond_resched_lock() itself could do. )

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/