Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: Fixed missed rt-balance points on priority shifts

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

 



>>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2007 at  9:53 PM, in message
<[email protected]>, Gregory Haskins
<[email protected]> wrote: 

> +		 * I have no doubt that this is the proper thing to do to make
> +		 * sure RT tasks are properly balanced.  What I cannot wrap my
> +		 * head around at this late hour is if issuing a reschedule()
> +		 * here may cause issues in other circumstances.  TBD
> +		 */
> +		if (!task_running(rq, p))
> +			resched_task(rq->curr);
> +	}

It dawned on me after I sent this that a further optimization here is to predicate the reschedule on whether we are overloaded.  In otherwords:

if (!task_running(rq, p) && rt_overloaded(rq))

Regards,
-Greg

--
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