Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755770AbYJTWdd (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:33:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752328AbYJTWdZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:33:25 -0400 Received: from mail.lang.hm ([64.81.33.126]:45634 "EHLO bifrost.lang.hm" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751933AbYJTWdY (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:33:24 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:34:07 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: linux-kernel Subject: sched_yield() options Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 840 Lines: 19 I've seen a lot of discussion about how sched_yield is abused by applications. I'm working with a developer on one application that looks like it's falling into this same trap (mutexes between threads and using sched_yield (or more precisely pthread_yield()) to let other threads get the lock) however I've been having a hard time tracking down the appropriate discussions to forward on to the developer (both for why what he's doing is bad, and for what he should be doing instead) could someone point out appropriate mailing list threads, or other documentation for this? David Lang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/