On Fri, 2025-10-10 at 16:23 +0200, Nam Cao wrote: > Gabriele Monaco <[email protected]> writes: > > +- Name: stall - wakeup in preemptive > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > copy-paste mistake?
Damn, right.. > > +- Type: per-task hybrid automaton > > +- Author: Gabriele Monaco <[email protected]> > > + > > +Description > > +----------- > > + > > +The stalled task (stall) monitor is a sample per-task timed monitor that > > checks > > +if tasks are scheduled within a defined threshold after they are ready:: > > + > > + | > > + | > > + v > > + #==================================# > > + H dequeued H <+ > > + #==================================# | > > + | | > > + | sched_wakeup;reset(clk) | > > + v | > > + +----------------------------------+ | > > + | enqueued | | > > + | clk < threshold_jiffies | | > > sched_switch_wait > > + +----------------------------------+ | > > + | | > > + | sched_switch_in | > > + sched_switch_in v | > > + sched_wakeup +----------------------------------+ | > > + +------------------ | | | > > + | | running | | > > + +-----------------> | | -+ > > + +----------------------------------+ > > I think this monitor does not detect if a task get preempted, but then > never get scheduled again? > > This sample monitor does not have to cover everything obviously, but I'm > curious if I understand it correct. Yes, that's right. I think I could cover that scenario by just going back to enqueued and resetting when preempted. Since it's a simple change, it's probably something meaningful to do.. Thanks, Gabriele
