On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, William Montgomery wrote:
>> >
> I am testing this code now. This code appears to allow a long latency
> path. If you have 2 SCHED_FIFO tasks which are both ready to run and
> the kernel is in this (long) free_inode loop, one task will get scheduled
> and if it finishes quickly the other task will have to wait.
>
> Could you explain again what the problem is when we always allow
> schedule?
>
> Wm
William, can you explain please this effect more precisely ?
What does mean "the other task will have to wait" ?
That the other task will not be scheduled until the inode freeing is finished,
while the other runs fine ?
How does the old 2.2.10-lowlatencyN6B kernel react to these 2 SCHED_FIFO
tasks ?
Benno.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 21:00:22 EST