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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox