Ingo/David, Resending this as I did not get any reply. This time I am attaching the testcases where I am noticing this Any feedback is appreciated -Dinakar On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:26:01AM +0530, Dinakar Guniguntala wrote: > Hi, > > I found that PI boosted SCHED_OTHER tasks behave like they have > SCHED_FIFO policy, while PI boosted SCHED_RR tasks continue to > behave like they have SCHED_RR policy. This didn't seem right > > Does something like the following patch make sense? > > -Dinakar > > > Index: linux-2.6.14/kernel/sched.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.14.orig/kernel/sched.c 2005-11-25 01:24:06.000000000 +0530 > +++ linux-2.6.14/kernel/sched.c 2005-11-25 01:24:26.000000000 +0530 > @@ -2986,8 +2986,9 @@ > * On PREEMPT_RT, boosted tasks will also get into this > * branch and wont get their timeslice decreased until > * they have done their work. > + * Boosted SCHED_OTHER tasks round-robin as well > */ > - if ((p->policy == SCHED_RR) && !--p->time_slice) { > + if ((p->policy != SCHED_FIFO) && !--p->time_slice) { > p->time_slice = task_timeslice(p); > p->first_time_slice = 0; > set_tsk_need_resched(p);
Attachment:
pitests.tar.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
- References:
- More PI issues with -rt
- From: Dinakar Guniguntala <[email protected]>
- More PI issues with -rt
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC]add ACPI hooks for IDE suspend/resume
- Next by Date: Re: Broadcom 43xx first results
- Previous by thread: More PI issues with -rt
- Next by thread: [PATCH 2.6.15-rc2] Fxi hardcoded cpu=0 in workqueue for per_cpu_ptr() calls
- Index(es):