From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750859AbWDRKDs (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:03:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750846AbWDRKDs (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:03:48 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-04.tampabay.rr.com ([65.32.5.134]:47602 "EHLO ms-smtp-04.tampabay.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750818AbWDRKDr (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:03:47 -0400 Message-ID: <4444B974.2080404@cfl.rr.com> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:03:32 -0400 From: Mark Hounschell Reply-To: dmarkh@cfl.rr.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060111) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: Lee Revell , markh@compro.net, Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: RT question : softirq and minimal user RT priority References: <200601131527.00828.Serge.Noiraud@bull.net> <1137167600.7241.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4443966B.8020802@compro.net> <1145286325.16138.26.camel@mindpipe> <44449EE2.8070907@cfl.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <44449EE2.8070907@cfl.rr.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mark Hounschell wrote: > > The default IRQ threads seem to be at RT priorities 25-49. So a user > should never have a RT compute bound task at a RT priority higher than > 25? Doesn't seem quite right. In any case, I have other less compute > bound lower priority RT tasks also running on the same CPU so my high > priority RT task must be giving up the CPU somewhere along the line. Why > is it not able to receive signals? Something is not quite right here. > > Regards > Mark > Actually those other tasks are on another CPU. Sorry. I still think something is amiss here? Mark