On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 01:09:35PM -0500, Stephen Clark wrote: > Con Kolivas wrote: > > >Here is an update for RSDL to version 0.28 > > > >Full patch: > >http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.20-sched-rsdl-0.28.patch > > > >Series: > >http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.20/ > > > >The patch to get you from 0.26 to 0.28: > >http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.20/sched-rsdl-0.26-0.28.patch > > > >A similar patch and directories will be made for 2.6.21-rc3 without > >further announcement > > > > > > > doesn't apply against 2.6.20.2: > > patch -p1 <~/2.6.20-sched-rsdl-0.28.patch --dry-run > patching file include/linux/list.h > patching file fs/proc/array.c > patching file fs/pipe.c > patching file include/linux/sched.h > patching file include/asm-generic/bitops/sched.h > patching file include/asm-s390/bitops.h > patching file kernel/sched.c > Hunk #41 FAILED at 3531. > 1 out of 62 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file kernel/sched.c.rej > patching file include/linux/init_task.h > patching file Documentation/sched-design.txt
It is easier to apply 2.6.20.2 on top of 2.6.20+RSDL. The .2 patch is a one-liner that you can easily fix by hand, and I'm not even certain that it is still required : --- ./kernel/sched.c.orig 2007-03-10 13:03:51 +0100 +++ ./kernel/sched.c 2007-03-10 13:08:02 +0100 @@ -3544,7 +3544,7 @@ next = list_entry(queue->next, struct task_struct, run_list); } - if (dependent_sleeper(cpu, rq, next)) + if (rq->nr_running == 1 && dependent_sleeper(cpu, rq, next)) next = rq->idle; switch_tasks: if (next == rq->idle) BTW, Con, I think that you should base your work on 2.6.20.[23] and not 2.6.20 next time, due to this conflict. It will get wider adoption. Regards, Willy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/