* Remy Bohmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello Ingo,
>
> I am using your yum-distributed kernel 2.6.19.1-rt15, and
> unfortunately I experienced very worse latencies. It turned out that
> ALL the IRQ threads were all running at prio 0, SCHED_OTHER.
>
> Looking at the current code in kernel/irq/manage.c, the goal was to
> put them at MAX_RT_PRIO, but the call to sys_sched_setscheduler()
> fails with EINVAL. I have attached a patch to set them to
> (MAX_RT_PRIO-1). This works.
oops - my intention was to set all IRQs and softirqs to SCHED_FIFO prio
50. I have fixed that now in my tree.
prio 99 is pretty extensive and makes it hard to move tasks 'above'
hardirq priority, without setting the priority of /every/ IRQ thread. So
i picked SCHED_FIFO:50 - at exact half way.
> Further I believe that each application of the RT-kernel requires a
> different configuration of these thread-priorities and I prefer to
> reconfigure these prios from userland during boot. As these
> threadnames contain whitespaces in its name, they make the
> shell-scripts unnecessary complex that I use to reconfigure the thread
> priorities.
ok - lets try it. Clark: does this impact the set_kthread_prio utility?
I've changed "IRQ 123" to "IRQ-123" to make pidof & friends work better.
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]
