Re: [RT] possible bug in trace_start_sched_wakeup

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

 



* Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:

>  	spin_lock(&sch.trace_lock);
> -	if (sch.task && (sch.task->prio >= p->prio))
> +	if (sch.task && ((sch.task->prio <= p->prio) || !rt_task(p)))
>  		goto out_unlock;

good catch - but i'd not do the !rt_task(p) condition, because e.g. PI 
related priority boosting works _without_ changing p->policy. So it is 
p->prio that controls. I.e. a simple "sch.task->prio <= p->prio" should 
be enough.

	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