On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 09:56:12AM -0600, Maynard Johnson wrote:
I haven't seen that the scheduler patch series got applied yet. This
Cell spu task notification patch is a pre-req for OProfile development
to support profiling SPUs. When the scheduler patch gets applied to a
kernel version that fits our needs for our OProfile development, I don't
see any problem in using the sched_flags field instead of notify_active.
I'll hopefull commit these patches this weekend, I'm at a conference
currently so not really able to do a lot of work. If you need to make
more progress until than just apply the hunk that introduces sched_flags
before doing your patch.
Yes, the yield() and the memory barriers were leftovers from an earlier
ill-conceived attempt at solving this problem. They should have been
removed. They're gone now.
Ok.
I hesitated doing this since it would entail changing spu_switch_notify
from being static to non-static. I'd like to get Arnd's opinion on this
question before going ahead and making such a change.
There is no difference in impact between marking a function non-static
and adding a trivial wrapper around it, only that the latter creates
more bloat. So I don't think there's a good argument against this.