Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Apr 2006 04:14:44 -0700 | Subject | Re: RT task scheduling | From | Bill Huey (hui) <> |
| |
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:51:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > no, i'm discussing precisely the point you raised:
Oh boy.
> >>> You should consider for a moment to allow for the binding of a > >>> thread to a CPU to determine the behavior of a SCHED_FIFO class task > >>> instead of creating a new run category. [...] > > with the observation that 1) binding is already possible [so your > suggestion is apparently knocking on open doors] 2) binding is a > separate mechanism (not adequate for all workloads) and it is thus > orthogonal to what i'm trying to achieve with the "RT overload" stuff. > Really simple and straightforward observations i think.
This is going to take some time to get the terminology right. It's late now and I'll have to continue this tomorrow.
First thing's first, SCHED_FIFO_GLOBAL for what you want in the main line is the same thing as SCHED_FIFO in -rt, right ?
bill
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |