From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sched: dev_deactivate_many(): use msleep(1) instead of yield() to wait for outstanding qdisc_run calls
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:47:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140307154739.GA18441@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5318EB2E.8040707@pengutronix.de>
* Marc Kleine-Budde | 2014-03-06 22:39:58 [+0100]:
>> Therefore it should allow lower priority threads to run, not just
>> equal or higher priority ones.
>
>Yes, we need a call that does what you described, however I'm not sure
>if yield() really does that. According to:
>
>http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/kernel/sched/core.c#L3599
>
>> * Typical broken usage is:
>> *
>> * while (!event)
>> * yield();
>> *
>> * where one assumes that yield() will let 'the other' process run that will
>> * make event true. If the current task is a SCHED_FIFO task that will never
>> * happen. Never use yield() as a progress guarantee!!
>
>My Process runs with SCHED_FIFO and prio > 50, with IRQ at default prio,
>which is 50.
>
>Maybe the RT guys can comment on this. I found another interesting
>function in the RT patch set: cpu_chill().
If you boot mainline without -RT, use threadirqs, start your application
do the same prio thing then you should end up with exactly the same
outcome. Please say so :)
msleep() is safe as long as it is used outside of the softirq. Nice that
you found cpu_chill() but on non-RT it turns to cpu_relax() and you do
not want this here.
wait_event() would be nice in the end to have. For now I take that patch
for -RT.
>Marc
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-07 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-04 23:49 [PATCH] net: sched: dev_deactivate_many(): use msleep(1) instead of yield() to wait for outstanding qdisc_run calls Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-03-06 21:06 ` David Miller
2014-03-06 21:39 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2014-03-07 15:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2014-03-07 4:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-03-09 19:09 ` Ben Hutchings
2014-03-09 22:53 ` David Miller
2014-03-09 23:17 ` Ben Hutchings
2014-03-09 23:28 ` David Lang
2014-03-10 0:07 ` Stanislav Meduna
2014-03-31 21:49 ` [PATCH] net: sched: dev_deactivate_many(): use msleep(1) instead of yield() to wait for outstanding qdisc_run callsb Thomas Gleixner
2014-04-02 11:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-02 11:17 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-04-04 15:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-04 15:26 ` David Miller
2014-04-07 11:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-04 15:28 ` David Miller
2014-04-07 11:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20140307154739.GA18441@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).