All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 11:36:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1056047804.1066.19.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A46BBDB345A7D5118EC90002A5072C780E04087F@orsmsx116.jf.intel.com>

On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 11:31, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:


> I don't think is ideal either, but it is the only way I see where we
> can make sure that no user thread is going to stomp over the kernel
> toes and cause a deadlock (this is a extreme, but it can happen).

Hmm, I guess a deadlock _is_ possible but I think the issue is more of
starvation.

And we can prevent starvation just by running the kernel thread at
FIFO/99, because then it will never be starved by a higher priority
task. If the RT task being starved is also at priority 99, it will
eventually block (as in our example, on console I/O) and let the kernel
thread run. If the RT task being starved is lower priority, then there
is nothing to worry about.

I guess a real deadlock could only occur if the FIFO/99 task does not
block on the resource the kernel thread is providing but busy loops
waiting for it.

It is all a trade off, and rarely a pleasant one...

	Robert Love



  reply	other threads:[~2003-06-19 18:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-06-19 18:31 O(1) scheduler seems to lock up on sched_FIFO and sched_RR ta sks Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 18:36 ` 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  6:52 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2003-06-19 17:43 ` 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=1056047804.1066.19.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.