Re: Discrepancy between comments for sched_find_first_bit

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Monday, March 29, 2010 - 3:25 am

On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 23:37 -0400, Matt Turner wrote:

(might help if you CC the scheduler people on scheduler functions :-)

Right, so it used to be 140 bits with the old O(1) scheduler, currently
(as you noted) sched_rt is the only user left and will therefore only
care about the first 100 bits.

As it stands I think it might still make sense to optimize this as for
rt loads it still on a hot path.

As to the 100 vs 140 length, would it really make much of difference to
shorten the implementation to 100? If not I'd leave it at 140.

Ingo, any comments?

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Discrepancy between comments for sched_find_first_bit, Matt Turner, (Sun Mar 28, 8:37 pm)
Re: Discrepancy between comments for sched_find_first_bit, Peter Zijlstra, (Mon Mar 29, 3:25 am)