Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:40:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:40:42 -0500 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:505 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:40:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 16:41:30 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk To: Robert Love Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] preempt-kernel on 2.4.19-pre2-ac2 bugfix Message-ID: <20020305004130.GK353@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: Robert Love , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1015287791.882.25.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1015287791.882.25.camel@phantasy> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:23:10PM -0500, Robert Love wrote: > The same schedule_tail bug affecting 2.5 affects 2.4 with O(1). I.e., > 2.4.19-pre2-ac2. > > In recent O(1) scheduler releases, an optimization was made that removed > schedule_tail from UP kernels. This causes the initial preempt_count of > a new task, which starts at 1, to never decrement to zero and thus never > become preemptible. CONFIG_PREEMPT requires schedule_tail, too. > > Users of 2.4+O(1)+preempt (i.e. -ac) should use this patch: > I believe you want to say that O(1)sched is in -ac, and this patch will add preempt on top of that, not that preempt is already in -ac (unless I missed something...) Mike - 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/