On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 14:05 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> --
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
> > There are three events that require consideration for redistributing RT
> > tasks:
> >
> > 1) When one or more higher-priority tasks preempts a lower-one from a
> >RQ
> > 2) When a
--
On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 20:15 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
> > +/* Push all tasks that we can to other CPUs */
> > +static void push_rt_tasks(struct rq *this_rq)
> > +{
> > + while (push_rt_task(this_rq));
> > +}
>
> I'd like to see an additional
--
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> There are three events that require consideration for redistributing RT
> tasks:
>
> 1) When one or more higher-priority tasks preempts a lower-one from a
>RQ
> 2) When a lower-priority task is woken up on a RQ
> 3) When a RQ downgrades its cur
On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 20:15 -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> +/* Push all tasks that we can to other CPUs */
> +static void push_rt_tasks(struct rq *this_rq)
> +{
> + while (push_rt_task(this_rq));
> +}
I'd like to see an additional termination condition to this loop (might
just be paranoia th
There are three events that require consideration for redistributing RT
tasks:
1) When one or more higher-priority tasks preempts a lower-one from a
RQ
2) When a lower-priority task is woken up on a RQ
3) When a RQ downgrades its current priority
Steve Rostedt's push_rt patch addresses (1). I
5 matches
Mail list logo
