On 05.01 Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> And if you fork off a child with its p->policy SCHED_YIELD set it will
> never get scheduled in.
>
> Only "just" running tasks can have SCHED_YIELD set.
>
> So the below lines are the *right* and most robust approch as far I can
> tell. (plus counter needs to be volatile, as every variable that can
> change under the C code, even while it's probably not required by the
> code involved with current->counter)
>
> > + {
> > + int counter = current->counter >> 1;
> > + current->counter = p->counter = counter;
> > + p->policy &= ~SCHED_YIELD;
> > + current->policy |= SCHED_YIELD;
> > + current->need_resched = 1;
> > + }
>
> Alan, the patch you merged in 2.4.4ac2 can fail like mine, but it may fail in
> a much more subtle way, while I notice if ksoftirqd never get scheduled
> because I synchronize on it and I deadlock, your kupdate/bdflush/kswapd
> may be forked off correctly but they can all have SCHED_YIELD set and
> they will *never* get scheduled. You know what can happen if kupdate
> never gets scheduled... I recommend to be careful with 2.4.4ac2.
>
It looks like this is related to my problem (see thread [Re: Linux-2.4.4-ac2]).
Funtions __start_kernel called kernel_thread(init,...), and seems to hang
on cpu_idle().
--
J.A. Magallon # Let the source
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # be with you, Luke...
Linux werewolf 2.4.4-ac1 #1 SMP Tue May 1 11:35:17 CEST 2001 i686
-
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/
