From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E22A9BA37 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2024 14:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717596467; cv=none; b=hX1bUPUVf/KjDT/NYU/RcmpBPiG0Rj1Y4E2BanUga8/PIQzNSPTIWTUZ0toc1pAfWyGhRchR82/AQZ8z3PDeutk9gwkqnvRqiSsjyoe3tLTMjFlXhCIqIkCDrlhzTtVpvdzDMzK8HT9Wwf0tr64cmqppNumRu1AG0+ZuikJFsSU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717596467; c=relaxed/simple; bh=G1kz/PRN23+QpsWh23o6YWf2s2yCUPcJwpFAPBnT3k0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=SMUXEc4dF4ZOb67vH9E166TmGyKwjg547auqYXdvtUCgQ/KuyzsJFSDCOq8dCSijeXjdnuPVpFj7+QagidY8j1hsoMFit4fxiRxFo796EIlJ8ttFqWi+BCmSZCei8pZ/2NDSPYbctNur8QlhGKkZaJA1D75MoxhjnczgbsZTn8Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Bo3og+LZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Bo3og+LZ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1717596464; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VEkSv/wkJy5gIacDcugoCBVPAdCY8hqPso/BOhBGtKA=; b=Bo3og+LZ6qp0bWdyPa4yfT3rWaEAmn7vOq7g87ZjuirFC0pOGxalc+F6t5uk6qlalipRLs NWWJRLhP4HuiBn7MGRWBaaZeLVzNY4Qo59AL/YBGr1fUfnhRdPBh4uIzUM3XpfC+8nIFg2 O0YJBRPzVki6rzPgdaJdiYRrVjRgm7E= Received: from mail-lf1-f69.google.com (mail-lf1-f69.google.com [209.85.167.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-500-UHUqbULvPZORoDOEotkvXg-1; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 10:07:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: UHUqbULvPZORoDOEotkvXg-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52b9267d9d6so3086271e87.2 for ; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 07:07:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717596460; x=1718201260; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=VEkSv/wkJy5gIacDcugoCBVPAdCY8hqPso/BOhBGtKA=; b=sNMUYjP14zyLeH0D+rzcuXRhfc39KT25kF6QArcnoCHKUhbBr6IXMl5zCjBcp3kvz1 5oh7XZymUvPeidtKQquFeaB2vGTQ5PaLkPElHYZsee7J9jRZlzFXwUTWXSOiH5GgiSfI JUH+D9spJkuEHHZIEJxHEO5Sott9xqW46b1rQQiGOM2+is3WAZEvXkKeHBfgik65ZKSQ jFyaJD18/P+HXvkq6f/qfSbeuD0Ejrttv/NciLpWBcgwhrorHQ34OuhZae/U2QvSa2N8 ABuxa/jyHW20b9hgzE0ixflvu6ZcGXtSm0zRyOfNTcWwn0mrUDqzOnK9jqGk1eGdOdYb Hxvg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXIqAYUrnAGwFJnJY5O/QCyAnIr3ARwSlCchgAz0PPAFx8wVTYDgGkybPtXLFsIpFHVm0s4KstXVwHWJAxS7GUSsg92rkHmqFND6/qnomTq+VAj X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwFA2858RQXZnyx9NWGhqT4pRpqp+TEn8W+nG51q3fgnB3zEiX4 JiQwxuloFVEAFG4Fdi6xZE3JsCZPmOFQJ533cWMEJcpTM/24InyBniSQ78hpkwFWZ52GC8XqlFx l/MYnUngOpUPUI4wW7TGqowUPYmIfTnMIlYJHu5XRz63eMcS2AldB2I/Eito5DUDOGeoaBA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3e1e:b0:521:cc8a:46dd with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52bab4ca688mr2447054e87.11.1717596459955; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEWQkEGTiF2US910j6qATuYv6PWll++dJZVRQ+oWbzvMc1eD4nMBj6V7rtuZUfVx9VVE5M1nw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3e1e:b0:521:cc8a:46dd with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52bab4ca688mr2447030e87.11.1717596459494; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 07:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.161] (host-79-23-6-148.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.23.6.148]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a68e6b5cdf8sm559531466b.81.2024.06.05.07.07.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Jun 2024 07:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 16:07:37 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sched/rt: Clean up usage of rt_task() To: Qais Yousef , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Steven Rostedt , Vincent Guittot , Thomas Gleixner , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , Andrew Morton , Jens Axboe , Metin Kaya , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Phil Auld References: <20240604144228.1356121-1-qyousef@layalina.io> <20240604144228.1356121-2-qyousef@layalina.io> <20240605093246.4h0kCR67@linutronix.de> <20240605132454.cjo4sjtybaeyeuze@airbuntu> From: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira In-Reply-To: <20240605132454.cjo4sjtybaeyeuze@airbuntu> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US, pt-BR, it-IT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 6/5/24 15:24, Qais Yousef wrote: >>> But rt is a shortened version of realtime, and so it is making *it less* >>> clear that we also have DL here. >> Can SCHED_DL be considered a real-time scheduling class as in opposite >> to SCHED_BATCH for instance? Due to its requirements it fits for a real >> time scheduling class, right? >> And RT (as in real time) already includes SCHED_RR and SCHED_FIFO. > Yeah I think the usage of realtime to cover both makes sense. I followed your > precedence with task_is_realtime(). > > Anyway. If people really find this confusing, what would make sense is to split > them and ask users to call rt_task() and dl_task() explicitly without this > wrapper. I personally like it better with the wrapper. But happy to follow the > crowd. For me, doing dl_ things it is better to keep them separate, so I can easily search for dl_ specific checks. rt_or_dl_task(p); would also make it clear that we have both. -- Daniel