From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@126.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] sched/rt: Provide new check_preempt_equal_prio_common()
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 14:33:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150426143303.07b62235@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1430068258-1960-1-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com>
On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 01:10:53 +0800
Xunlei Pang <xlpang@126.com> wrote:
> From: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
>
> When p is queued, there may be other tasks already queued at the
> same priority in the "run queue", so we should peek the most front
> one to do the equal priority preemption.
>
> This patch modifies check_preempt_equal_prio() and provides new
> check_preempt_equal_prio_common() to do the common preemption.
This change log fails to explain why this is needed.
>
> There are also other cases to be added calling the new interface
> in the following patches.
A change log should stand on its own, and not just say, other patches
will use it. It can say that, if it fully explains why the change is
needed.
Also note, you are missing a 0/6 email that explains the entire
rational of the patch set, such that people understand more what you
intend to accomplish. We have no idea what your overall goal is.
-- Steve
>
> Signed-off-by: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@linaro.org>
> ---
> kernel/sched/rt.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-26 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-26 17:10 Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 17:10 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] sched/rt: Check to push task away when its affinity is changed Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 17:10 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] sched/rt: Check to push FIFO current away at each tick Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 18:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-04-26 17:10 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] lib/plist: Provide plist_add_head() for nodes with the same prio Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 17:10 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] sched/rt: Fix wrong SMP scheduler behavior for equal prio cases Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 17:10 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] sched/rt: Requeue p back if the preemption of check_preempt_equal_prio_common() failed Xunlei Pang
2015-04-26 18:33 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
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=20150426143303.07b62235@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pang.xunlei@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=xlpang@126.com \
/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®