Re: [PATCH] sched: minor optimization
- From: "Dmitry Adamushko" <dmitry.adamushko@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 13:18:20 +0100
On 24/11/2007, Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@xxxxxxx> wrote:
As an optimization, if all tasks are in the fair class, the next task is
directly picked from fair_sched_class. But, if it returns no task we go
through again from sched_class_highest which could be avoided and
instead return the idle task directly.
The only legitimate possibility of having the fair_sched_class
returning no task in this case is when 'rq->nr_running ==
rq->cfs.nr_running == 0'.
iow, a possible optimization would be just the following check :
if (rq->nr_running == 0)
return idle_sched_class.pick_next_task(rq);
at the beginning of pick_next_task().
(or maybe put it at the beginning of the
if (likely(rq->nr_running == rq->cfs.nr_running)) {} block as we
already have 'likely()' there).
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH] sched: minor optimization
- From: Nikanth Karthikesan
- [PATCH] sched: minor optimization
- Prev by Date: time accounting problem (powerpc only?)
- Next by Date: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] sched: minor optimization
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] sched: minor optimization
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
