On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:35:08AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> I bet that this improves cross-cpu wakeup latency, too -- the old code >> would presumably wake up the cpu and then immediately interrupt it. > > Yeah,. its what clued Mike in to there being a problem. > >> It might be nice to rename one or both of need_resched and >> test_need_resched, though -- the difference is somewhat inscrutable. > > I agreed, I've just been unable to come up with anything sane. > > The best I could come up with is renaming > {set,clear,test}_need_resched() to {}_tif_need_resched(), so we then end > up with test_tif_need_resched(), which is slightly more different from > need_resched().
Nothing great. That's at least better than the current state, I think. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/