* Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > (3) rework enqueue/dequeue_entity() to get rid of > > sched_class::set_curr_task() > > Dmitry/Ingo, > I am sorry for not having reviewed this change properly, but I > think we need to revert this. ah, i was wondering about that already. We can certainly skip that optimization. > In theory its possible to solve these problems w/o reintroducing > set_curr_task(). I tried doing so, but found it clutters > dequeue_entity and enqueue_entity a lot and makes it less readable. It > will duplicate what put_prev_entity() and set_next_entity() are > supposed to do. Moreoever it is slightly inefficient to do all these > in dequeue_entity() if we consider that dequeue_entity can be called > on current task for other reasons as well (like when it is abt to > sleep or change its nice value). yeah, it's not worth it. I'd go for keeping the code unified even if adds a few instructions runtime overhead, as i'd expect most distros to enable fair-group-scheduling by default in the future. (once all the containers infrastructure and tools has trickled down to them) Ingo _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
