Re: [RFC][PATCH 05/22] sched: SCHED_DEADLINE policy implementation

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 02:18 +0100, Raistlin wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 21:21 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > +       if (dl_time_before(dl_se->deadline, rq->clock) ||
> > > +           dl_entity_overflow(dl_se, rq->clock)) {
> > > +               dl_se->deadline = rq->clock + dl_se->dl_deadline;
> > > +               dl_se->runtime = dl_se->dl_runtime;
> > > +       }
> > > +} 
> > 
> > Can't we loose runtime deficit this way?

>  - if unblocking happens _before_ it becomes eligible again, the 
>    enqueue will be later handled by the dl_timer itself, when it'll
>    fire, and the task will be given a replenishment starting from its
>    negative runtime;
>  - if unblocking happens _later_ than the firing of dl_timer, resetting
>    the scheduling parameters should be just fine, from the bandwidth
>    point of view.
> 
> Does it make sense?

Yes, I think so. Thanks!
--
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/