On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 08:35:29AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 02:14:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 06:02:55PM +0900, [email protected] wrote: > > > From: Byungchul Park <[email protected]> > > > > > > current code ensures a task has a normalized vruntime when switching off > > > from fair class, but it does not ensure the task has a non-normalized > > > vruntime when switching back to the fair class. > > > > > > this is an example breaking this consistency. > > > > > > 1. a task is in fair class and !queue > > > 2. change its class to rt class (still !queue) > > > 3. change its class to fair class again (stll !queue) > > > > Just curious, did you manage to trigger this in practise or did you find > > it through code inspection only?
i found it through code inspection, and then i checked it with debugger. > > hello, > > not only through code inspection, but also checked it through gdb debugger. > when returning back to fair class (step 3), vruntime was still normalized. > more exactly, it has a very large value which means negative value. > > > -- > > 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/ > -- > 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/ -- 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/
