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