Re: [PATCH v7 02/11] task_isolation: add initial support

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:18:42PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:17:17AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:

quoted

+
+	while (READ_ONCE(dev->next_event.tv64) != KTIME_MAX) {

You should add a function in tick-sched.c to get the next tick. This
is supposed to be a private field.

Just to make it clear. Neither the above nor a similar check in
tick-sched.c is going to happen.

This busy waiting is just horrible. Get your act together and solve
the problems at the root and do not inflict your quick and dirty
'solutions' on us.

That's why I proposed a wait-wake scheme instead with the tick stop
code. What's your opinion about such direction?