Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755537AbZLCDw0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:52:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754654AbZLCDwZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:52:25 -0500 Received: from nskntqsrv01p.mx.bigpond.com ([61.9.168.231]:29832 "EHLO nskntqsrv01p.mx.bigpond.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754592AbZLCDwY (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:52:24 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 8816 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:52:24 EST Message-ID: <4B17138D.3040003@bigpond.net.au> Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:25:33 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-3.9.b4.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Galbraith , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar CC: LKML , Steven Rostedt , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [patch] f83f9ac causes tasks running at MAX_PRIO References: <1259501027.6268.9.camel@marge.simson.net> <1259754383.4003.610.camel@laptop> <1259758150.6167.8.camel@marge.simson.net> In-Reply-To: <1259758150.6167.8.camel@marge.simson.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com from [123.211.185.123] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 3 Dec 2009 01:25:33 +0000 X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150201.4B17138E.002C,ss=1,fgs=0 X-SIH-MSG-ID: qRw0Ftb8TECznTh522DtQVUtlUy7/yU1v8pWRYIhuRsaT1jBuMDAQsKmbaJDwp6CjHtcQk/WLnEjc6zlV43UuNq0Mb5RWrnj Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1139 Lines: 22 On 02/12/09 22:49, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Hysterical reasons? That might have been a doorstop conversion kit for > O(1), but boots fine with CFS, and prio 40 tasks are history. In my (not so) humble opinion, there is still a lot of unnecessary cruft in sched.c that should have been removed as the final (clean up) stage of implementing CFS (i.e. stuff that was needed for O(1) but no longer serves a useful purpose). I know that the extra overhead of this code is probably inconsequential (and the compiler may even optimize some of it away) but it looks untidy and makes the code harder to understand. Recent patches that I've submitted were intended as a start to removing some of this cruft and I had intended to send more patches after they were accepted. I figured that it was better to do it as a number of small changes rather than one big one. Should I continue? Peter -- 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/