Message-ID: <3D27347C.29DC9014@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 22:18:36 +0400
From: oleg@tv-sign.ru
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
CC: mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [patch] sched-2.5.24-D3, batch/idle priority scheduling, SCHED_BATCH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 971
Lines: 30

Hello.

I beleive this patch against entry.S should be sufficient:

--- entry.S~    Sat Jul  6 21:01:16 2002
+++ entry.S     Sat Jul  6 21:06:14 2002
@@ -255,7 +255,7 @@
        testb $_TIF_NEED_RESCHED, %cl
        jz work_notifysig
 work_resched:
-       call schedule
+       call schedule_userspace
        cli                             # make sure we don't miss an
interrupt
                                        # setting need_resched or
sigpending
                                        # between sampling and the iret

Both calls to schedule() at resume_kernel: and work_pending:
have clear kernel/user return path.

And users of __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__ and kernel_thread() should not
have policy == SCHED_BATCH.

No?
-
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/