Chris Friesen wrote: > > The yielding task has given up the cpu. The other task should get to > > run for a timeslice (or whatever the equivalent is in CFS) until the > > yielding task again "becomes head of the thread list".
> Are you sure this isn't happening? I'll run some tests on my SMP > system running CFS. But I'll bet the context switch rate is quite rapid. Yep, that's exactly what's happening. The tasks are alternating. They are both always ready-to-run. The yielding task is put at the end of the queue for its priority level. There is no reason the yielding task should get less CPU since they're both always ready-to-run. The only downside here is that a yielding task results in very small timeslices which causes cache inefficiencies. A sane lower bound on the timeslice might be a good idea. But there is no semantic problem. DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
