Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling

+	current->per_call = next->per_call;

Pointer instead of structure copy?

Sure, there are lots of trade-offs there, but the story changes if we keep the 1:1 relationship between task_struct and thread_info.

- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
    • From: Davide Libenzi <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [take35 0/10] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
• Next by Date: [PATCH] Include missing header in include/asm-sparc64/tlb.h
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling
• Next by thread: [PATCH 3 of 4] Teach paths to wake a specific void * target instead of a whole task_struct
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]