Messages in this thread | | | From | John Stultz <> | Date | Thu, 21 Dec 2023 09:13:42 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 00/23] Proxy Execution: A generalized form of Priority Inheritance v7 |
| |
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:35 AM Metin Kaya <metin.kaya@arm.com> wrote: > On 20/12/2023 12:18 am, John Stultz wrote: > > > > As Connor outlined in a previous submission of this patch series, > > Nit: Better to have a reference to Connor's patch series (i.e., > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221003214501.2050087-1-connoro@google.com/) > here?
Yes, thank you for providing the link!
> > * As discussed at OSPM[5], I like to split pick_next_task() up > > into two phases selecting and setting the next tasks, as > > currently pick_next_task() assumes the returned task will be > > run which results in various side-effects in sched class logic > > when it’s run. I tried to take a pass at this earlier, but > > it’s hairy and lower on the priority list for now. > > Do you think we should mention virtual runqueue idea and adding trace > points to measure task migration times? They are not "open issues", but > kind of to-do items in the agenda. >
I appreciate you bringing those up. The virtual runqueue idea is still a bit handwavy, but the trace points are a good item for the TODO. Apologies for missing it, as you suggested it just the other day as I was prepping these patches, and I didn't go back to add it here in the cover letter.
thanks -john
| |