Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 11:18:30 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: can the scheduler decide to schedule an interrupted but runnable thread on another CPU core? What are the implications for code? Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmo=C4MRdyAGegD8MkCgx9ibbWtrWefYYugz=qpyOEmZcxg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201402141318.44743.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <CAJ-Vmo=7Nz1jqXy%2BrTQ7u9_ZP7jeFOKUJxU1O51tYJjvTUmWTg@mail.gmail.com> <201402141139.49158.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmo=vQ%2BMX%2Br3z6_Y4aJiWUBxXgXE7APjTsUysVPN2aoghXQ@mail.gmail.com> <201402141318.44743.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 February 2014 10:18, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > If they are all cpuset to a single CPU, they should not migrate, though > I think sched_bind() can override that. However, that requires code to > explicitly call sched_bind() which should be rare. Yup. That's why I'm confused. I'm rebuilding -HEAD now with the latest flowtable changes. I'll add in my debugging afterward and trigger the particular scenario where it's behaving badly and do some more diagnostics. Thanks, -a
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=C4MRdyAGegD8MkCgx9ibbWtrWefYYugz=qpyOEmZcxg>