Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

Jack O'Quin
2005-01-15T01:17:14Z

Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> writes:

> At 05:31 PM 1/13/2005 -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
>>Yes. However, my tests have so far shown a need for "actual FIFO as
>>long as the task behaves itself."
>
> I for one wonder why that appears to be so. What happens if you use
> SCHED_RR instead of SCHED_FIFO?
>
> (ie is the problem just one of running out of slice at a bad time, or
> is it the dynamic priority adjustment)

I have no quick and easy test for that.

If it's important, I can modify a version of JACK to use SCHED_RR,
instead.

I very much doubt it would make any difference, since we normally only
run one realtime thread at a time. Each client taps the next on the
shoulder when it is time for it to run, so there is essentially no
concurrency among them.
--
joq