From: Raistlin <raistlin@linux.it>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Song Yuan <song.yuan@ericsson.com>,
Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Nicola Manica <nicola.manica@disi.unitn.it>,
Luca Abeni <lucabe72@email.it>,
Claudio Scordino <claudio@evidence.eu.com>,
Harald Gustafsson <harald.gustafsson@ericsson.com>,
Bjoern Brandenburg <bbb@email.unc.edu>,
bastoni@cs.unc.edu, Giuseppe Lipari <lipari@retis.sssup.it>
Subject: Re: periods and deadlines in SCHED_DEADLINE
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:50:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1278748227.4390.26.camel@Palantir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1278685951.1900.215.camel@laptop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2064 bytes --]
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 16:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 15:38 +0200, Raistlin wrote:
> > - do you think it could be useful to have a different syscall to deal
> > with the period parameter (if it's different from deadline), e.g.,
> > something useful to make the task periodic as you have (if I remember
> > well) in Xenomai or RTAI?
> > If you think it's worth doing that, do you think the
> > task_wait_interval() syscall that we already added could/should do
> > the job?
>
> Again, I'm afraid I need some extra education here in order to make a
> sensible comment.
>
Hey, fine, where's the problem? :-P
> What are the exact semantics of this extra proposed syscall?
>
Right now, it is:
task_wait_interval(t) --> "wake me up at the first instant after t when
you can give me my full runtime"
> What exactly are the benefits over not having it, and simply rely on the
> task to not wake up more often, but if it does have it run into the lack
> of budget and sort it that way?
>
What you're saying obviously will always work, and it is actually a
quite common usage pattern (we use it like that a lot! :-)).
The new syscall might help when it is important for a task to
synchronize with the budget provisioning mechanism. It might be
uncommon, but there could be situations --more in hard than in soft
scenarios-- where you want to be sure that you're next job (and all the
subsequent ones, if you behave well) will get its full runtime, even if
this means waiting a little bit.
what I was wondering was if this semantic should be modified by the
introduction of the "period", but I also agree with Luca that we must do
our best to avoid confusion!
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)
http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@ekiga.net /
dario.faggioli@jabber.org
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-10 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-09 13:38 periods and deadlines in SCHED_DEADLINE Raistlin
2010-07-09 14:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-09 14:51 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-09 16:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 9:01 ` Raistlin
2010-07-10 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 14:49 ` Raistlin
2010-07-11 6:42 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-08-03 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-04 3:52 ` Andrea Bastoni
2010-08-04 7:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-04 5:18 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-08-03 9:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-04 3:53 ` Andrea Bastoni
2010-08-04 5:02 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-10 7:08 ` Raistlin
2010-07-11 6:46 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-08-03 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-03 11:42 ` Gregory Haskins
2010-08-04 6:30 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-09 14:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 7:11 ` Luca Abeni
2010-07-10 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-11 6:12 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-09 14:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 9:14 ` Raistlin
2010-07-10 17:19 ` Harald Gustafsson
2010-07-10 18:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 20:08 ` Harald Gustafsson
2010-07-10 21:52 ` Raistlin
2010-07-11 5:41 ` Harald Gustafsson
2010-07-11 7:32 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-12 10:21 ` Harald Gustafsson
2010-08-04 5:55 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-08-02 19:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-04 4:44 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-09 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 7:50 ` Raistlin [this message]
2010-07-10 15:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-10 17:29 ` Harald Gustafsson
2010-07-11 6:15 ` Bjoern Brandenburg
2010-07-10 7:09 ` Luca Abeni
2010-07-10 9:20 ` Raistlin
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=1278748227.4390.26.camel@Palantir \
--to=raistlin@linux.it \
--cc=bastoni@cs.unc.edu \
--cc=bbb@email.unc.edu \
--cc=claudio@evidence.eu.com \
--cc=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
--cc=harald.gustafsson@ericsson.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lipari@retis.sssup.it \
--cc=lucabe72@email.it \
--cc=nicola.manica@disi.unitn.it \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=song.yuan@ericsson.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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