> yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
> > i'm not inclined to teach schedulers about curlwp.
> Why not, because it may be idle LWP?

because there is no benefit.

> > for what purpose?
> Currently, it needs l->l_cpu, but it could use curcpu().

sched_nextlwp() and sched_curcpu_runnable_p() likely need to use curcpu(), yes.

> In future, some schedulers may also need l->l_sched_info. But this question
> could be leaved, while it's only a possibility right now.

do you have any possible examples, which should be in sched_nextlwp()
rather than sched_enqueue()?

YAMAMOTO Takashi