> > well, we can do the wait_task_inactive() in both cases - in
> > release_task(), and in __put_task_struct(). [in the release_task() path
> > that will just be a nop]. This further simplifies the patch.
>
> I think the _real_ simplification is to just have the task switch do
> this in the tail:
if possible i'd avoid putting more overhead into the scheduler - it's
clearly more performance-sensitive than the task create/exit path.
Ingo
-
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/