Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:40:48 +0100 From: Johan Pettersson <manlix@demonized.net> To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] for SCHED_ULE & libpthread issue (was Re: I like SCHED_4BSD) Message-ID: <20040318094048.4d961c12.manlix@demonized.net> In-Reply-To: <20040318023045.GE3018@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <XFMail.20040310213645.conrads@cox.net> <4050BBCB.50302@cinci.rr.com> <20040312092348.18be60e0.taku@cent.saitama-u.ac.jp> <20040318023045.GE3018@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:30:45 -0800
"David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Do people think we should commit this?
>
> > --- sched_ule.c.orig Fri Feb 13 05:24:48 2004
> > +++ sched_ule.c Fri Feb 13 05:37:53 2004
> > @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@
> > #define SCHED_INTERACTIVE(kg) \
> > (sched_interact_score(kg) < SCHED_INTERACT_THRESH)
> > #define SCHED_CURR(kg, ke) \
> > - (ke->ke_thread->td_priority != kg->kg_user_pri || \
> > + (ke->ke_thread->td_priority < kg->kg_user_pri || \
> > SCHED_INTERACTIVE(kg))
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1166,11 +1166,8 @@
> > */
> > if ((ke->ke_flags & KEF_ASSIGNED) == 0) {
> > if (TD_IS_RUNNING(td)) {
> > - if (td->td_proc->p_flag & P_SA) {
> > - kseq_load_rem(KSEQ_CPU(ke->ke_cpu), ke);
> > - setrunqueue(td);
> > - } else
> > - kseq_runq_add(KSEQ_SELF(), ke);
> > + kseq_load_rem(KSEQ_CPU(ke->ke_cpu), ke);
> > + setrunqueue(td);
If it makes the situation better, why not? It sounds likes it works well
for Peter, Brian and Arjan. I have not tested it though.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040318094048.4d961c12.manlix>