Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1720765

Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag

From Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag
Date 2017-08-27 09:00 +0200
Message-ID <uiZI5-44i-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <uiUfn-nC-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <uiYCl-3nF-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <uiZI6-44i-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, 2017-08-26 at 23:18 -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> 
> > Sync is not a contract, it's a hint.  If you really want sync behavior,
> > you need to create a contract signed in blood to signal that you really
> > really are passing the baton.
> 
> Yes that is the usecase of binder, we are really passing the baton
> when we pass sync. We also make binder to not pass sync if there's
> more work todo and more tasks to wake up. In all current and past
> products, we have been using sync has a hard contract as you said.
> Are you proposing addition of another flag to differentiate between
> the existing hint and the contract?

Yes, the alternative being to unilaterally (as you did) make the
existing hint a contract, in which case you would get to deal with any
fallout.  You'd certainly get some "yay, you rock" mail, but you'd also
get some "boo, you suck rocks" to go with it :)

	-Mike

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-08-27 03:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-27 07:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-27 08:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-08-27 08:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-27 09:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-27 20:10 +0200
          Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-08-28 07:30 +0200
            Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-28 08:20 +0200
              Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-28 08:50 +0200
              Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-08-28 18:30 +0200
                Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-28 19:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com> - 2017-08-27 08:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-08-27 09:00 +0200

csiph-web