* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Bill Huey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I'm quite aware of what you're saying as well as a much of the
> > contents of the -rt patch. Please don't assume that I'm not aware of
> > this. The -rt patch doesn't do SWSRPS, [...]
>
> to the contrary, the "RT overload" code in the -rt tree does strict,
> system-wide RT priority scheduling. That's the whole point of it.
so after this "clarification of terminology" i hope you are in picture
now, so could you please explain to me what you meant by:
> > You should consider for a moment to allow for the binding of a
> > thread to a CPU to determine the behavior of a SCHED_FIFO class task
> > instead of creating a new run category. [...]
to me it still makes no sense, and much of the followups were based on
this. Or were you simply confused about what the scheduling code in -rt
does precisely? Did that get clarified now?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
