* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! [not found] ` <20050607053306.GA16181@elte.hu> @ 2005-06-07 11:25 ` Steven Rostedt 2005-06-07 15:48 ` Dean Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 11:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, LKML, Andrew Morton, anton.wilson On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 07:33 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > I tested the patch on an SMP machine where MAX_RT_PRIO = 100 and > > MAX_USER_RT_PRIO = 99. Without the patch, the system crashes with a > > reboot. > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> If this patch does go in, then xpc_activating in arch/ia64/sn/kernel/xpc_main.c (from rc6) also needs to use MAX_RT_PRIO instead of MAX_USER_RT_PRIO. Unless it is OK that it runs lower in priority than other kernel threads. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! 2005-06-07 11:25 ` [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 15:48 ` Dean Nelson 2005-06-07 17:31 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Dean Nelson @ 2005-06-07 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: mingo, linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, linux-kernel, akpm, anton.wilson On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:25:04AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 07:33 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > > > I tested the patch on an SMP machine where MAX_RT_PRIO = 100 and > > > MAX_USER_RT_PRIO = 99. Without the patch, the system crashes with a > > > reboot. > > > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > > If this patch does go in, then xpc_activating in > arch/ia64/sn/kernel/xpc_main.c (from rc6) also needs to use MAX_RT_PRIO > instead of MAX_USER_RT_PRIO. Unless it is OK that it runs lower in > priority than other kernel threads. You are correct xpc_activating() needs to be changed to use MAX_RT_PRIO. So please do add that change to your patch. Thanks, Dean ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! 2005-06-07 15:48 ` Dean Nelson @ 2005-06-07 17:31 ` Steven Rostedt 2005-06-07 19:10 ` Dean Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dean Nelson Cc: mingo, linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, linux-kernel, akpm, anton.wilson On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 10:48 -0500, Dean Nelson wrote: > You are correct xpc_activating() needs to be changed to use MAX_RT_PRIO. > So please do add that change to your patch. I haven't tested this patch, I just used the previous patch (which I did test) and added your change. -- Steve --- linux-2.6.12-rc6/kernel/sched.c.orig 2005-06-07 13:22:33.000000000 -0400 +++ linux-2.6.12-rc6/kernel/sched.c 2005-06-07 13:22:37.000000000 -0400 @@ -3347,7 +3347,7 @@ p->policy = policy; p->rt_priority = prio; if (policy != SCHED_NORMAL) - p->prio = MAX_USER_RT_PRIO-1 - p->rt_priority; + p->prio = MAX_RT_PRIO-1 - p->rt_priority; else p->prio = p->static_prio; } @@ -3379,7 +3379,8 @@ * 1..MAX_USER_RT_PRIO-1, valid priority for SCHED_NORMAL is 0. */ if (param->sched_priority < 0 || - param->sched_priority > MAX_USER_RT_PRIO-1) + (p->mm && param->sched_priority > MAX_USER_RT_PRIO-1) || + (!p->mm && param->sched_priority > MAX_RT_PRIO-1)) return -EINVAL; if ((policy = SCHED_NORMAL) != (param->sched_priority = 0)) return -EINVAL; --- linux-2.6.12-rc6/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/xpc_main.c.orig 2005-06-07 13:23:26.000000000 -0400 +++ linux-2.6.12-rc6/arch/ia64/sn/kernel/xpc_main.c 2005-06-07 13:23:43.000000000 -0400 @@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ partid_t partid = (u64) __partid; struct xpc_partition *part = &xpc_partitions[partid]; unsigned long irq_flags; - struct sched_param param = { sched_priority: MAX_USER_RT_PRIO - 1 }; + struct sched_param param = { sched_priority: MAX_RT_PRIO - 1 }; int ret; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! 2005-06-07 17:31 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 19:10 ` Dean Nelson 2005-06-07 19:23 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Dean Nelson @ 2005-06-07 19:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: mingo, linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, linux-kernel, akpm, anton.wilson On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:31:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 10:48 -0500, Dean Nelson wrote: > > You are correct xpc_activating() needs to be changed to use MAX_RT_PRIO. > > So please do add that change to your patch. > > I haven't tested this patch, I just used the previous patch (which I did > test) and added your change. I just built and tested a kernel and xp/xpc/xpnet modules with your patch applied. It ran fine. The priorities of the xpc kthreads were correct. Looks good to me. Thanks, Dean ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! 2005-06-07 19:10 ` Dean Nelson @ 2005-06-07 19:23 ` Steven Rostedt 2005-06-07 20:19 ` Dean Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dean Nelson Cc: mingo, linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, linux-kernel, akpm, anton.wilson On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 14:10 -0500, Dean Nelson wrote: > I just built and tested a kernel and xp/xpc/xpnet modules with your patch > applied. It ran fine. The priorities of the xpc kthreads were correct. > > Looks good to me. Dean, If you can do me a favor, the way you really want to test this is by changing MAX_USER_RT_PRIO to 99 and MAX_RT_PRIO to (MAX_USER_RT_PRIO+1). This will make sure that the patch is working. Your kernel thread should still run at priority 99. Check it with: ps -eo pid,rtprio,comm And grep for your thread name. Thanks, -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! 2005-06-07 19:23 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2005-06-07 20:19 ` Dean Nelson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Dean Nelson @ 2005-06-07 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: mingo, linux-ia64, linux-altix, edwardsg, linux-kernel, akpm, anton.wilson On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 03:23:02PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 14:10 -0500, Dean Nelson wrote: > > > I just built and tested a kernel and xp/xpc/xpnet modules with your patch > > applied. It ran fine. The priorities of the xpc kthreads were correct. > > > > Looks good to me. > > Dean, > > If you can do me a favor, the way you really want to test this is by > changing MAX_USER_RT_PRIO to 99 and MAX_RT_PRIO to > (MAX_USER_RT_PRIO+1). This will make sure that the patch is working. > Your kernel thread should still run at priority 99. > > Check it with: ps -eo pid,rtprio,comm > > And grep for your thread name. Just did as you asked and things seem fine. Ran on an SGI altix. (The first process shown below shouldn't have a priority of 99, just the others.) cranberry5:~ # ps -eo pid,rtprio,comm | grep xpc 13325 - xpc_hb 13327 99 xpc08 13467 99 xpc06 13469 99 xpc06c1 13501 99 xpc06c1 13502 99 xpc06c1 cranberry5:~ # ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-07 20:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1118112390.4533.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
[not found] ` <20050607053306.GA16181@elte.hu>
2005-06-07 11:25 ` [PATCH] MAX_USER_RT_PRIO and MAX_RT_PRIO are wrong! Steven Rostedt
2005-06-07 15:48 ` Dean Nelson
2005-06-07 17:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-06-07 19:10 ` Dean Nelson
2005-06-07 19:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-06-07 20:19 ` Dean Nelson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox