[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190617122448.GA3436@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:24:48 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
tglx@...utronix.de, John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
richard@....at
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Document that RT task priorities are 1…99
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 11:08:21PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> John identified three files which claim that RT task priorities start at
> zero. As far as I understand, 0 is used for DL and has nothing to do
> wihich RT priorities as identified by the RT policy.
>
> Correct the comment, valid RT priorities are in the range from 1 to 99.
It all depends on what view I'm afraid. User priorities go from 1-99, as
per sched_get_priority_{min,max}(), but Kernel priority is:
kernel_prio := MAX_RT_PRIO-1 - user_prio
and that then gives [0-98], where 0 is max and 98 is min (see
__sched_setscheduler() and normal_prio()).
And DL uses kernel prio -1 (there is no user prio equivalent).
Nice maps to:
kernel_prio := MAX_RT_PRIO + (MAX_NICE - MIN_NICE + 1) / 2 + user_nice
which is: [100-139].
Which then, as derRichard says, leaves (kernel) 99 unaccounted for.
> Reported-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
> ---
> Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt | 2 +-
> include/linux/sched/prio.h | 2 +-
> kernel/sched/cpupri.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt
> index d8fce3e784574..23f8f8465a775 100644
> --- a/Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/scheduler/sched-rt-group.txt
> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ get their allocated time.
>
> Implementing SCHED_EDF might take a while to complete. Priority Inheritance is
> the biggest challenge as the current linux PI infrastructure is geared towards
> -the limited static priority levels 0-99. With deadline scheduling you need to
> +the limited static priority levels 1-99. With deadline scheduling you need to
> do deadline inheritance (since priority is inversely proportional to the
> deadline delta (deadline - now)).
>
This might be correct,.. but I feel we should strive to delete
everything rt groups.
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/prio.h b/include/linux/sched/prio.h
> index 7d64feafc408e..6986c32356842 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/prio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/prio.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
>
> /*
> * Priority of a process goes from 0..MAX_PRIO-1, valid RT
> - * priority is 0..MAX_RT_PRIO-1, and SCHED_NORMAL/SCHED_BATCH
> + * priority is 1..MAX_RT_PRIO-1, and SCHED_NORMAL/SCHED_BATCH
> * tasks are in the range MAX_RT_PRIO..MAX_PRIO-1. Priority
> * values are inverted: lower p->prio value means higher priority.
> *
So that comment talks about kernel prio, and there, as we've shown, 0 is
an actual valid RR/FIFO priority (in fact, the highest).
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpupri.h b/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> index 7dc20a3232e72..40257a97fb8f2 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/cpupri.h
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
> #define CPUPRI_INVALID -1
> #define CPUPRI_IDLE 0
> #define CPUPRI_NORMAL 1
> -/* values 2-101 are RT priorities 0-99 */
> +/* values 2-101 are RT priorities 1-99 */
Again, this is kernel prios, not user prios.
> struct cpupri_vec {
> atomic_t count;
> --
> 2.20.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists