Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.43-00

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

* Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:

> > actually, what priorities do the yielding tasks have? sched_yield() does 
> > not guarantee that the CPU will be given up, of if a highest-prio 
> > SCHED_FIFO task is in a yield() loop it will livelock the system.
> 
> What scares me is the code in fs/inode.c with that 
> __wait_on_freeing_inode.  Look at the code in find_inode and 
> find_inode_fast.  Here you will see that they really are busy loops 
> with a yield in them, if the inode they are waiting on is I_FREEING or 
> I_CLEAR and the process doing this hasn't set I_LOCK.  I haven't 
> looked much at this, but my kernel has livelocked on it.

ok, makes sense.

> Currently my fix is in yield to lower the priority of the task calling 
> yield and raise it after the schedule.  This is NOT a proper fix. It's 
> just a hack so I can get by it and test other parts.

yeah, yield() is a quite RT-incompatible concept, which could livelock 
an upstream kernel just as much - if the task in question is SCHED_FIFO.  
Almost all yield() uses should be eliminated from the upstream kernel, 
step by step.

	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]
  Powered by Linux