[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170711170212.htpx5zz7kaiqc5pf@e106622-lin>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:02:12 +0100
From: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it,
claudio@...dence.eu.com, tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it,
bristot@...hat.com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, tkjos@...roid.com,
joelaf@...gle.com, andresoportus@...gle.com,
morten.rasmussen@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
patrick.bellasi@....com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/8] sched/cpufreq_schedutil: make worker kthread
be SCHED_DEADLINE
On 11/07/17 18:18, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 09:59:00AM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > @@ -4065,6 +4067,9 @@ static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p,
> > }
> >
> > if (user) {
> > + if (attr->sched_flags & SCHED_FLAG_SPECIAL)
> > + return -EPERM;
>
> Should be -EINVAL I think, as if the bit didn't exist at all (it
> doesn't, from a userspace perspective).
>
Makes sense. I'll change it.
Thanks,
- Juri
Powered by blists - more mailing lists