On Fri, 1 May 2015 00:33:18 +0800
Xunlei Pang <xlp...@126.com> wrote:
> From: Xunlei Pang <pang.xun...@linaro.org>
>
> - Remove "has_pushable_tasks(rq)" condition, because for queued p,
> "!task_running(rq, p)" and "p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1" implies true
> "has_pushable_tasks(rq)".
This makes sense.
>
> - Remove "!test_tsk_need_resched(rq->curr)" condition, because
> the flag might be set right before the waking up, but we still
> need to push equal or lower priority tasks, it should be removed.
> Without this condition, we actually get the right logic.
But doesn't that happen when we schedule?
-- Steve
>
> Signed-off-by: Xunlei Pang <pang.xun...@linaro.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/rt.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/rt.c b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> index a9d33a3..9d735da 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/rt.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/rt.c
> @@ -2233,8 +2233,6 @@ out:
> static void task_woken_rt(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p)
> {
> if (!task_running(rq, p) &&
> - !test_tsk_need_resched(rq->curr) &&
> - has_pushable_tasks(rq) &&
> p->nr_cpus_allowed > 1 &&
> (dl_task(rq->curr) || rt_task(rq->curr)) &&
> (rq->curr->nr_cpus_allowed < 2 ||
--
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/
