Re: [BUG] How to get real-time priority using idle priority

[Mike Galbraith]

On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 11:30 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 11:14 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > Which leads me to suggest the following
> > 
> > ---
> > diff --git a/kernel/sched_fair.c b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > index 8e1352c..f2d2d94 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched_fair.c
> > @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ static void update_min_vruntime(struct cfs_rq
> > *cfs_rq)
> >  						   struct sched_entity,
> >  						   run_node);
> >  
> > -		if (vruntime == cfs_rq->min_vruntime)
> > +		if (!cfs_rq->curr)
> >  			vruntime = se->vruntime;
> >  		else
> >  			vruntime = min_vruntime(vruntime, se->vruntime);
> 
> Aha.  Yeah, I'll re-test with that instead.

Works a treat.

> > The below can be split into 3 patches:
> > 
> >  - the idle weight change (do we really need that? why?)
> 
> I saw idle tasks slamming extremely far.  I'll verify, less is more.

time advanced in 100ms
weight=2
64765.988352
67012.881408
88501.412352

weight=3
35496.181411
34130.971298
35497.411573

Measured from an RT shell doing..
   while sleep .1; do cat /proc/sched_debug >> /debug; done
..for a pinned chew.  Not necessarily gnats-arse accurate, but good
enough to see the margin of error is pretty high with weight=2.

Your call.

	-Mike

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/