[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1315929858.6312.16.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:04:18 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com, patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 44/55] rcu: wire up RCU_BOOST_PRIO for
rcutree
On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 08:34 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 02:02:14PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > @@ -1608,7 +1618,7 @@ static int rcu_node_kthread(void *arg)
> > continue;
> > }
> > per_cpu(rcu_cpu_has_work, cpu) = 1;
> > - sp.sched_priority = RCU_KTHREAD_PRIO;
> > + sp.sched_priority = current->rt_priority;
>
> This is broken -- the per-node kthread runs at RT prio 99, but we usually
> would not want to boost that high.
Ouch, right. My userland sets things on boot, so it works.
> Seems like we should have a global variable that tracks the current
> priority. This global variable could then be set in a manner similar
> to the softirq priorities -- or, perhaps better, simply set whenever
> the softirq priority is changed.
>
> Thoughts?
RCU threads would have to constantly watch for user priority changes on
their own, and update private data methinks.
-Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists