From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Jakub Jozwicki <jozwicki@aster.pl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: sched_yield() on 2.6.25
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:04:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1213023893.23439.187.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806090837.25121.jozwicki@aster.pl>
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 08:37 +0200, Jakub Jozwicki wrote:
> > > Is this behavior expected?
> >
> > The behavior of sched_yield with SCHED_OTHER processes has changed
> > several times with Linux over the years, since its behavior is not
> > defined by standards, so it's really "whatever the scheduler feels like
> > doing". The behavior is only defined with realtime scheduling
> > (SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_OTHER).
> >
> > Generally, it's a mistake to assume specific timing behavior from
> > sched_yied for SCHED_OTHER processes.
>
> From the man sched_yield:
>
> A process can relinquish the processor voluntarily without blocking by
> calling sched_yield(). The process will then be moved to the end of the
> queue for its static priority and a new process gets to run.
>
> and also IEEE/Open Group:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/sched_yield.html
Yeah, except that is for Real-Time scheduling classes, SCHED_OTHER
doesn't have static priority queues.
SCHED_OTHER doesn't have a specified implementation - so relying on it
to do anything specific is well outside the scope of definition.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-09 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.5iKTy3xTJkKWZLGio+GIHXi3+0o@ifi.uio.no>
2008-06-08 22:09 ` Robert Hancock
2008-06-09 6:37 ` Jakub Jozwicki
2008-06-09 9:03 ` Helge Hafting
2008-06-09 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
[not found] <aCBfw-3Cv-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <aCBfw-3Cv-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <aCJd6-3IF-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <aCRaM-8cM-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
2008-06-11 15:28 ` Bodo Eggert
2008-06-11 22:45 ` Leon Woestenberg
2008-06-12 8:09 ` Helge Hafting
2008-06-12 22:33 ` Bodo Eggert
2008-06-13 8:37 ` Helge Hafting
2008-06-08 11:34 Jakub W. Jozwicki
2008-06-09 9:35 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1213023893.23439.187.camel@twins \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=jozwicki@aster.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®