Re: RFC: revert 43fa5460fe60

2015-02-24 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:19:06 -0800 Jörn Engel wrote: > Well, reverting was my first instinct, but for different reasons I think > it is wrong. Simply reverting can result in the high priority thread > moving from one cpu with a running process to a different cpu with a > running process. In bot

Re: RFC: revert 43fa5460fe60

2015-02-24 Thread Jörn Engel
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:33:44AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:55:09 -0500 > Jörn Engel wrote: > > > I came across a silly problem that tempted me to revert 43fa5460fe60. > > We had a high-priority realtime thread woken, TIF_NEED_RESCHED was set > > for the running threa

Re: RFC: revert 43fa5460fe60

2015-02-24 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 09:55:09 -0500 Jörn Engel wrote: > Hello Steven! > > I came across a silly problem that tempted me to revert 43fa5460fe60. > We had a high-priority realtime thread woken, TIF_NEED_RESCHED was set > for the running thread and the realtime thread didn't run for >2s. > Problem w

Re: RFC: revert 43fa5460fe60 ("sched: Try not to migrate higher priority RT tasks")

2015-02-23 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Jörn Engel wrote: > Hello Steven! > > I came across a silly problem that tempted me to revert 43fa5460fe60. So just to save everyone having to go to the Git tree to remember which patch that was: 43fa5460fe60 ("sched: Try not to migrate higher priority RT tasks") Thanks, Ingo -

Re: RFC: revert 43fa5460fe60

2015-02-23 Thread Jörn Engel
Looks like Gregory Haskins' email bounces. Should have figured as much. Jörn -- The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing. -- John Powell -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More major