On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 10:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * 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.
Ah, I don't know what I was thinking about the rt_task part (I was
working on very little sleep). You're right. Nuke it!
Thanks,
-- Steve
-
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]
