[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1212171634070.3148@ionos>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:35:49 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.6.9-rt21
On Sat, 15 Dec 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 17:05 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Dear RT Folks,
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the 3.6.9-rt21 release. 3.6.7-rt18, 3.6.8-rt19
> > and 3.6.9-rt20 are not announced updates to the respective 3.6.y
> > stable releases without any RT changes
> >
> > Changes since 3.6.9-rt20:
> >
> > * Fix the PREEMPT_LAZY implementation on ARM
> >
> > * Fix the RCUTINY issues
> >
> > * Fix a long standing scheduler bug (See commit log of
> > sched-enqueue-to-head.patch)
>
> That last has an oversight buglet.
>
> sched: add missing userspace->kernel struct sched_param.sched_priority inversion
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4624,7 +4624,7 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct t
> p->sched_reset_on_fork = reset_on_fork;
>
> oldprio = p->prio;
> - if (oldprio == param->sched_priority)
> + if (oldprio == (MAX_RT_PRIO - 1) - param->sched_priority)
> goto out;
>
> on_rq = p->on_rq;
Duh, yes. But there is another one here:
+ enqueue_task(rq, p, oldprio < param->sched_priority ?
+ ENQUEUE_HEAD : 0);
Bah. This reverse user/kernel priority nonsense really should go away!
Thanks,
tglx
--
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