lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 17/22] sched: add signaling overrunning -deadline tasks.
From
Date
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 22:58 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 08:40 +0200, Raistlin wrote:
> > +static inline void __dl_signal(struct task_struct *tsk, int which)
> > +{
> > + struct siginfo info;
> > + long long amount = which == SF_SIG_DMISS ? tsk->dl.stats.last_dmiss :
> > + tsk->dl.stats.last_rorun;
> > +
> > + info.si_signo = SIGXCPU;
> > + info.si_errno = which;
> > + info.si_code = SI_KERNEL;
> > + info.si_pid = 0;
> > + info.si_uid = 0;
> > + info.si_value.sival_int = (int)amount;
> > +
> > + /* Correctly take the locks on task's sighand */
> > + __group_send_sig_info(SIGXCPU, &info, tsk);
> > + /* Log what happened to dmesg */
> > + printk(KERN_INFO "SCHED_DEADLINE: 0x%4x by %Ld [ns] in %d (%s)\n",
> > + which, amount, task_pid_nr(tsk), tsk->comm);
> > +}
>
> This being a G-EDF like scheduler with a u<=1 schedulability test, we're
> firmly in soft-rt territory which means the above will be very easy to
> trigger.. Maybe not spam dmesg?
>
Ok, right. Maybe, if I add the SF_HARD_RT flag (and force the hard tasks
to run on a single CPU they must specify) I can keep the notification
for those tasks only. What do you think?

Thanks,
Dario

--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)

http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@ekiga.net /
dario.faggioli@jabber.org
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-12 16:43    [W:0.246 / U:1.724 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site