Re: [PATCH 03/14] sched: SCHED_DEADLINE structures & implementation.

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:43:35PM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote:
> @@ -1693,8 +1701,14 @@ void sched_fork(struct task_struct *p)
>  		p->sched_reset_on_fork = 0;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!rt_prio(p->prio))
> +	if (dl_prio(p->prio)) {
> +		put_cpu();
> +		return -EAGAIN;

Is this really the error we want to return on fork()?

EAGAIN to me indicates a spurious error and we should try again later;
however as it obvious from the code above; we'll always fail, there's no
point in trying again later.

I would think something like EINVAL; even though there are no arguments
to fork(); would me a better option.

Then again; I really don't care too much; anybody any preferences?
--
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/