3.2.69-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Brian Silverman <[email protected]>

commit 746db9443ea57fd9c059f62c4bfbf41cf224fe13 upstream.

When non-realtime tasks get priority-inheritance boosted to a realtime
scheduling class, RLIMIT_RTTIME starts to apply to them. However, the
counter used for checking this (the same one used for SCHED_RR
timeslices) was not getting reset. This meant that tasks running with a
non-realtime scheduling class which are repeatedly boosted to a realtime
one, but never block while they are running realtime, eventually hit the
timeout without ever running for a time over the limit. This patch
resets the realtime timeslice counter when un-PI-boosting from an RT to
a non-RT scheduling class.

I have some test code with two threads and a shared PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT
mutex which induces priority boosting and spins while boosted that gets
killed by a SIGXCPU on non-fixed kernels but doesn't with this patch
applied. It happens much faster with a CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT kernel, and
does happen eventually with PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY kernels.

Signed-off-by: Brian Silverman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Link: 
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
[bwh: Backported to 3.2: adjust filename, context]
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
---
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -5224,8 +5224,11 @@ void rt_mutex_setprio(struct task_struct
 
        if (rt_prio(prio))
                p->sched_class = &rt_sched_class;
-       else
+       else {
+               if (rt_prio(oldprio))
+                       p->rt.timeout = 0;
                p->sched_class = &fair_sched_class;
+       }
 
        p->prio = prio;
 

--
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/

Reply via email to