Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

[Ingo Molnar]

* Esben Nielsen <nielsen.esben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I took a brief look at it. Have you tested priority inheritance?

yeah, you are right, it's broken at the moment, i'll fix it. But the 
good news is that i think PI could become cleaner via scheduling 
classes.

> As far as I can see rt_mutex_setprio doesn't have much effect on 
> SCHED_FAIR/SCHED_BATCH. I am looking for a place where such a task 
> change scheduler class when boosted in rt_mutex_setprio().

i think via scheduling classes we dont have to do the p->policy and 
p->prio based gymnastics anymore, we can just have a clean look at 
p->sched_class and stack the original scheduling class into 
p->real_sched_class. It would probably also make sense to 'privatize' 
p->prio into the scheduling class. That way PI would be a pure property 
of sched_rt, and the PI scheduler would be driven purely by 
p->rt_priority, not by p->prio. That way all the normal_prio() kind of 
complications and interactions with SCHED_OTHER/SCHED_FAIR would be 
eliminated as well. What do you think?

	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/