[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOVSwNEQzhzoKwnW5dZn8YsL5G+80_yvodmeJKBs2dSAxn7MsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 22:29:04 +0200
From: "Tadeus (Eus) Prastowo" <0x657573@...glemail.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Priority Inheritance] SCHED_FIFO or SCHED_RR?
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 21:12 +0200, Tadeus (Eus) Prastowo wrote:
>> > Why should a SCHED_NORMAL task inheriting the priority of a SCHED_RR
>> > task get the privilege of SCHED_FIFO task for running as long as it
>> > wishes even when the task giving the inheritance does not have such
>> > privilege?
>
> Existence of a critical section > slice would be the real problem, no?
No, it's not a problem because if a real-time system designer puts a
real-time task under SCHED_RR, he will calculate the length of the
critical section by taking into account the slice.
For the case of one SCHED_RR task sharing a critical section with one
SCHED_NORMAL task, the worst-case blocking time of the SCHED_RR task
is found by multiplying the critical section execution time taking
into account the slice by two.
> -Mike
--
Eus
--
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