lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Cbe-oss-dev] [PATCH] Cell SPU task notification
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 09:56:12AM -0600, Maynard Johnson wrote:
> I haven't seen that the scheduler patch series got applied yet. This
> Cell spu task notification patch is a pre-req for OProfile development
> to support profiling SPUs. When the scheduler patch gets applied to a
> kernel version that fits our needs for our OProfile development, I don't
> see any problem in using the sched_flags field instead of notify_active.

I'll hopefull commit these patches this weekend, I'm at a conference
currently so not really able to do a lot of work. If you need to make
more progress until than just apply the hunk that introduces sched_flags
before doing your patch.

> Yes, the yield() and the memory barriers were leftovers from an earlier
> ill-conceived attempt at solving this problem. They should have been
> removed. They're gone now.

Ok.

> I hesitated doing this since it would entail changing spu_switch_notify
> from being static to non-static. I'd like to get Arnd's opinion on this
> question before going ahead and making such a change.

There is no difference in impact between marking a function non-static
and adding a trivial wrapper around it, only that the latter creates
more bloat. So I don't think there's a good argument against this.
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-01-19 05:13    [W:0.105 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site