From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar 18 00:40:57 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9096A16A4CE; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:40:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fisk.demonized.net (h97n2fls33o834.telia.com [213.66.186.97])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id C3DB943D4C; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:40:56 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from manlix@demonized.net)
Received: from beard.demonized.net (beard.demonized.net [172.22.1.2])
	by fisk.demonized.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i2I8emCg000672;
	Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:40:49 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from manlix@demonized.net)
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:40:48 +0100
From: Johan Pettersson <manlix@demonized.net>
To: obrien@freebsd.org
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>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.10 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] for SCHED_ULE & libpthread issue (was Re: I like
 SCHED_4BSD)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:40:57 -0000

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.