On 09/11/2007, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [ ... ] > > As a solution to this problem, I moved sched_fork() call, which > initializes scheduler related fields on a new task, before > copy_namespaces(). I am not sure though whether moving up will > cause other side-effects. Do you see any issue? Should be ok (IMHO and at first glance :-) > - The second problem exposed by this test is that task_new_fair() > assumes that parent and child will be part of the same group (which > needn't be as this test shows). As a result, cfs_rq->curr can be NULL > for the child. Would it be better, logically-wise, to use is_same_group() instead? Although, we can't have 2 groups with cfs_rq->curr != NULL on the same CPU... so if the child belongs to another group, it's cfs_rq->curr is automatically NULL indeed. -- Best regards, Dmitry Adamushko _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
