* Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com> wrote:

quoted text
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> >But, because you assert it that it's risky to "criticise sched_yield() 
> >too much", you sure must know at least one real example where it's right 
> >to use it (and cite the line and code where it's used, with 
> >specificity)?
> 
> It's fine to criticise sched_yield().  I agree that new apps should 
> generally be written to use proper completion mechanisms or to wait 
> for specific events.

yes.

quoted text
> However, there are closed-source and/or frozen-source apps where it's 
> not practical to rewrite or rebuild the app.  Does it make sense to 
> break the behaviour of all of these?

See the background and answers to that in:

   http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/19/357
   http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/9/19/328

there's plenty of recourse possible to all possible kinds of apps. Tune 
the sysctl flag in one direction or another, depending on which behavior 
the app is expecting.

	Ingo
-
unsubscribe notice
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/