Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-06-01 Thread Qais Yousef
On 05/31/24 08:30, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-05-30 12:10:44 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > > This is not consistent because IMHO the clock setup & slack should be > > > handled equally. So I am asking the sched folks for a policy and I am > > > leaning towards looking at task-poli

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-30 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2024-05-30 12:10:44 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > This is not consistent because IMHO the clock setup & slack should be > > handled equally. So I am asking the sched folks for a policy and I am > > leaning towards looking at task-policy in this case instead of prio > > because you shouldn't do

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-30 Thread Qais Yousef
On 05/29/24 12:55, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-05-29 11:34:09 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > > behaviour. But then it is insistent which matters only in the RT case. > > > Puh. Any sched folks regarding policy? > > > > I am not sure I understood you here. Could you rephrase please?

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-29 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2024-05-29 11:34:09 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > behaviour. But then it is insistent which matters only in the RT case. > > Puh. Any sched folks regarding policy? > > I am not sure I understood you here. Could you rephrase please? Right now a SCHED_OTHER task boosted to a realtime priority

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-29 Thread Qais Yousef
On 05/29/24 10:29, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-05-27 18:26:50 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > > In order to be PI-boosted you need to acquire a lock and the only lock > > > you can sleep while acquired without generating a warning is a mutex_t > > > (or equivalent sleeping lock) on P

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-29 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2024-05-27 18:26:50 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > In order to be PI-boosted you need to acquire a lock and the only lock > > you can sleep while acquired without generating a warning is a mutex_t > > (or equivalent sleeping lock) on PREEMPT_RT. > > Note we care about the behavior for !PREEMP

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-27 Thread Qais Yousef
On 05/23/24 11:45, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2024 23:05:36 +0100 > Qais Yousef wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/sched/deadline.h b/include/linux/sched/deadline.h > > index df3aca89d4f5..5cb88b748ad6 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/sched/deadline.h > > +++ b/include/linux/sched/dea

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-27 Thread Qais Yousef
On 05/21/24 13:00, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2024-05-15 23:05:36 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > > rt_task() checks if a task has RT priority. But depends on your > > dictionary, this could mean it belongs to RT class, or is a 'realtime' > > task, which includes RT and DL classes. > > >

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-23 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 15 May 2024 23:05:36 +0100 Qais Yousef wrote: > diff --git a/include/linux/sched/deadline.h b/include/linux/sched/deadline.h > index df3aca89d4f5..5cb88b748ad6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/sched/deadline.h > +++ b/include/linux/sched/deadline.h > @@ -10,8 +10,6 @@ > > #include > > -#

Re: [PATCH v2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task()

2024-05-21 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 2024-05-15 23:05:36 [+0100], Qais Yousef wrote: > rt_task() checks if a task has RT priority. But depends on your > dictionary, this could mean it belongs to RT class, or is a 'realtime' > task, which includes RT and DL classes. > > Since this has caused some confusion already on discussion [1]