From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>
Cc: "'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@digeo.com>,
"'george anzinger'" <george@mvista.com>,
"'joe.korty@ccur.com'" <joe.korty@ccur.com>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Li, Adam" <adam.li@intel.com>
Subject: RE: O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks
Date: 19 Jun 2003 10:43:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1056044580.8770.34.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A46BBDB345A7D5118EC90002A5072C780DD16DB3@orsmsx116.jf.intel.com>
On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 23:52, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
> Then some output would show on my serial console when events/0 is
> reprioritized...
>
> OTOH, what do you think of Robert's idea of adding 20 levels of
> priorities for the kernel's sole use?
That was your idea, I just said the infrastructure was in place and we
could do it ;-)
I am not so sure it is ideal. I hesitate to make kernel threads FIFO at
a maximum priority, let alone an even greater one. I would really prefer
to find a nicer solution. Anyhow, if we make events FIFO/99 that would
also solve the problem, without dipping into extra high levels.
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-19 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-19 6:52 O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 17:43 ` Robert Love [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-06-20 2:53 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 19:22 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 18:31 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 18:36 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 6:06 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 6:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-06-19 16:00 ` george anzinger
2003-06-19 17:19 ` 'joe.korty@ccur.com'
2003-06-19 17:23 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 17:28 ` Joe Korty
2003-06-19 4:38 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 2:55 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 1:44 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 1:58 ` Robert Love
2003-06-19 2:02 ` george anzinger
2003-06-19 4:34 ` 'joe.korty@ccur.com'
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1056044580.8770.34.camel@localhost \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=adam.li@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
--cc=joe.korty@ccur.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.