> David,
> please try to reply courteously to queries by other people.
> And specially
> when you're the one who's wrong. Mohit is right - Linux had a
> long standing problem where sched_yield() system call didn't work. It
> was only fixed in Linux 2.4.
Didn't work in accordance wit
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Mohit Aron wrote:
> you're expecting is lying in wait for me. Here is simple logic
> for you to figure out - if you have one run queue, and two
> threads calling sched_yield() (and hence theoretically putting
> themselves at the end of run queue), perfect alternation should
>
Thanks for a reasonable/thoughtful reply.
> to expect perfect alternation is not reasonable. the scheduler
> (or one of its subsidiary and/or supporting functions) decides what
> should run and what shouldn't. the linux scheduler did have problems
> in 2.2 (and still does in some places).
On Sunday 04 February 2001 21:50, Matt wrote:
> in this case you will see that in 2.2.18 a SCHED_YIELD process will
> get a "goodness" value of 0, however in 2.4.1-ac1 you will find that
> it gets a value of -1 (and hence a lower scheduling priority). i dont
> have a machine handy that is running
mohit,
to expect perfect alternation is not reasonable. the scheduler
(or one of its subsidiary and/or supporting functions) decides what
should run and what shouldn't. the linux scheduler did have problems
in 2.2 (and still does in some places). however last i checked
sched_yield() is at
David,
please try to reply courteously to queries by other people. And specially
when you're the one who's wrong. Mohit is right - Linux had a
long standing problem where sched_yield() system call didn't work. It
was only fixed in Linux 2.4.
> > Also, it is NOT unrealistic to expect perfec
> I'm using 2.4.1-pre10, glibc 2.1.3.
And I'm using Linux 2.2. And the sched_yield bug exists in Linux 2.2. I
found
a huge number of posted bug reports on linux-kernel regarding this issue.
Check http://boudicca.tux.org/hypermail/linux-kernel/2000week21/0858.html
for one.
> Threa
> What version of Linux are you using ? What I see is the following:
I'm using 2.4.1-pre10, glibc 2.1.3.
> Thread1
> Thread1
> Thread1
> Thread1
> Thread1
> Thread2
> Thread2
> Thread2
> Thread2
> Thread2
That's totall
wartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 3:09 AM
To: Mohit Aron; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: system call sched_yield() doesn't work on Linux 2.2
The program you attached worked perfectly for me. You need to
'fflush(stdout);' after each 'printf&#x
The program you attached worked perfectly for me. You need to
'fflush(stdout);' after each 'printf'. You didn't expect perfect alternation
did you? That's totally unrealistic. You cannot use the scheduler as a
synchronization mechanism.
--
Thread1
Thread1
Thread2
Thread1
Thread1
Thread2
10 matches
Mail list logo
