From: Victor Yodaiken <yodaiken@fsmlabs.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Victor Yodaiken <yodaiken@fsmlabs.com>,
george anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Scheduler issue 1, RT tasks ...
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:42:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011226204215.A1007@hq2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011223171915.B19931@hq2> <Pine.LNX.4.40.0112231708361.971-100000@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.40.0112231708361.971-100000@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com>
On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 05:20:26PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2001, Victor Yodaiken wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 02:36:07PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > > > My understanding of the POSIX standard is the the highest priority
> > > > task(s) are to get the cpu(s) using the standard calls. If you want to
> > > > deviate from this I think the standard allows extensions, but they IMHO
> > > > should be requested, not the default, so I would turn your flag around
> > > > to force LOCAL, not GLOBAL.
> > >
> > > So, you're basically saying that for a better standard compliancy it's
> > > better to have global preemption policy by default. And having users to
> > > request rt tasks localization explicitly. It's fine for me.
> >
> > Can you please cite the passaaages in the standrd you have in mind?
>
> POSIX 1003. The doubt was if ( since the POSIX standard does not talk
> about SMP ) the real time priorities apply to CPU or to the entire system.
Right, that was my question. George says, in your words, "for better
standards compliancy ..." and I want to know why you guys think that.
> This because the scheduler i'm working on has two kind of RT tasks, local
> and global ones. Local RT tasks cannot preempt remote CPU so if, for
> example, one RT task is woke up and its last CPU is running another RT
> task with higher priority, the fresly woke up task will wait even if other
> CPUs are running tasks wil lower priority. Global RT task will force
> remote preemption in case the last CPU that ran the woke up RT task is
> running another higher priority RT task. Global RT tasks have their own
> queue and lock like CPUs. My old default was local RT task that was
> forced by a setscheduler() flag SCHED_RTGLOBAL while George suggested that
> it's better to have default global and to have this behavior forced by a
> SCHED_RTLOCAL flag. I already changed the code to default to global.
>
>
>
>
> - Davide
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-27 3:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-20 21:11 [RFC] Scheduler issue 1, RT tasks Davide Libenzi
2001-12-20 22:25 ` george anzinger
2001-12-20 22:21 ` Momchil Velikov
2001-12-20 22:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-21 17:00 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-12-21 17:19 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-21 17:33 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-12-21 18:29 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-24 0:18 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-12-24 1:31 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-24 5:33 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-12-24 18:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-27 3:01 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-12-27 17:41 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-28 0:05 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-12-28 0:48 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-20 22:36 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-24 0:19 ` Victor Yodaiken
2001-12-24 1:20 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-27 3:42 ` Victor Yodaiken [this message]
2001-12-27 17:48 ` Davide Libenzi
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-12-28 9:45 Martin Knoblauch
2001-12-29 9:12 ` george anzinger
2001-12-29 19:02 Dieter Nützel
2001-12-29 21:00 ` Andrew Morton
2001-12-29 22:24 ` Davide Libenzi
[not found] <200112291907.LAA25639@messenger.mvista.com>
2001-12-30 10:01 ` george anzinger
2001-12-30 19:54 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-12-31 13:56 ` george anzinger
2002-01-01 18:55 ` Dieter Nützel
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=20011226204215.A1007@hq2 \
--to=yodaiken@fsmlabs.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.