Re: [RT] possible bug in trace_start_sched_wakeup

[Ingo Molnar]

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  	spin_lock(&sch.trace_lock);
> -	if (sch.task && (sch.task->prio >= p->prio))
> +	if (sch.task && ((sch.task->prio <= p->prio) || !rt_task(p)))
>  		goto out_unlock;

good catch - but i'd not do the !rt_task(p) condition, because e.g. PI 
related priority boosting works _without_ changing p->policy. So it is 
p->prio that controls. I.e. a simple "sch.task->prio <= p->prio" should 
be enough.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/