Re: [PATCH] sched/deadline: document behavior of sched_yield()

[luca abeni]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 09:31:56 -0300
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 09/09/2016 09:24 AM, luca abeni wrote:
> > Ok, but the task is still throttled, right?  
> 
> I see your point, but... it is important to keep the documentation sync
> with the code, and the code/explanation can be simpler now... :-)

I perfectly agree with this...

My main point was that the word "throttled" should probably be used
instead of "blocked", and that the term "reservation period" should
not be used because it has not been defined...
Then, the "since the remaining runtime goes to 0" part of my suggestion
is wrong and the sentence should be rephrased in some other way.

Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?


			Thanks,
				Luca